On 2009/03/10 09:18, Stefan Sperling wrote: > On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 09:22:16AM +0100, Pierre Riteau wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 12:56 AM, Stefan Sperling <s...@stsp.name> wrote: > > > Attached is a very quick-and-easy drive-by port of mktorrent. > > > > A port of this program was already submitted by Dmitri Alenichev: > > http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports&m=123292286529064&w=2 > > Ah, thanks. I'll look at that submission, too. > > > This one installs documentation files but I don't know if this is > > really needed: they only contain the license and the changelog. > > Hmmm. Only the licence... > > This is probably an FAQ, but I was actually wondering what to do > about the following condition in the licence: > > * Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright > notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the > documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. > > Since the port creates a binary package, shouldn't the binary package > include the LICENSE file as per this condition? Common practice seems to > be to omit licence files from packages. Do we leave it up to users to check > the upstream distribution for the licence of a binary package before they > redistribute the binary package? > > (I am hoping for a straightforward answer here and not some can-of-worms > discussion...) > > Stefan >
Personally I'd include it. Opinions may vary :-)
