RE: Would software for non-commercial use be acceptable as a port?
This is how DansGuardian works, and it's a part of the ports tree (www/dansguardian). The install points the user to the licensing page on the web. It's up to the user to decide if they're eligible for the non-com license. Thanks a lot for that example, that's a very helpful example indeed. Wasn't even aware of this one so far. And apologies for misaddressing my response in the first place, thus making it end up in your private mailbox instead of the list. Kind regards, Peter -- .\\ S/MIME public key: http://www.catslair.org/pubkey.crt +- My semi-private Root CA: http://ssl.losoco.nl/losoco.crt ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
RE: Would software for non-commercial use be acceptable as a port?
There are a number of entries in ports/LEGAL along the lines of no commercial use, often with RESTRICTED or NO_CDROM or the like also set in the ports' Makefile's. Lots of examples to extrapolate from there. Thanks for the pointers. I had already skimmed through the Porters handbook but was under the impression that the limitations one could place on the software only involved around distribution or storage and not so much other forms of licensing as well. Obviously it didn't help to overlook LEGAL completely as well :-) Now I have plenty of material and examples to work with, and will contact the company behind this software to check if they agree with my ideas as well. Kind regards, Peter -- .\\ S/MIME public key: http://www.catslair.org/pubkey.crt +- My semi-private Root CA: http://ssl.losoco.nl/losoco.crt ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Would software for non-commercial use be acceptable as a port?
Hi gang, I've been professionally using FreeBSD for quite some time now (my company now uses 4 FreeBSD servers for web services) and during the implementation period I've become quite fascinated with the ports system. And this evening I suddenly had an idea, but I'm not too sure how feasible this idea is, so I'm hoping some of you guys would be willing to give me some suggestions or advice. I've been using a commercial software product for the past 4 years now; I started using it on Linux and nowadays I use it on Windows. The company behind this product provides several editions of their product, including a community edition which can be used free of charge but non-commercial use only. It does have some functional limitations which, in my opinion (but I am biased), aren't really intrusive. For example if you print some output you'll get a watermark too. Stuff like that. Even so; I strongly support this software. Like I said before I've been using it myself for the past 4 years (in all fairness: I got myself a commercial license too, which wasn't too expensive in my opinion) and even now I'm still quite passionate about this stuff. Now; I read that the ports collection provides a /truly/ free environment and doesn't shun entries which may not match the idea of free and/or open source software. So my question should be obvious: Would I be right to assume that the software product as I described it above could be a liable addition for the ports collection, or is there something I'm overlooking? Needless to say I'm obviously contacting the company behind it as well, I can say I'm in quite good terms with them, and nothing will be done without their explicit permission. But before I start on such an endeavor I'd really appreciate if you guys could confirm (or deny) if my plans are actually feasible? Am I right to conclude that the product, with the non-commercial clause I described above, could be a candidate for the ports collection or would the restriction be a huge obstacle? Thanks in advance for any comments, I'd really appreciate some advice and/or comments here. Kind regards, Peter -- .\\ S/MIME public key: http://www.catslair.org/pubkey.crt +- My semi-private Root CA: http://ssl.losoco.nl/losoco.crt ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Would software for non-commercial use be acceptable as a port?
This is how DansGuardian works, and it's a part of the ports tree (www/dansguardian). The install points the user to the licensing page on the web. It's up to the user to decide if they're eligible for the non-com license. On 2013-07-27 5:37 PM, Peter Looyenga p...@catslair.org wrote: Hi gang, I've been professionally using FreeBSD for quite some time now (my company now uses 4 FreeBSD servers for web services) and during the implementation period I've become quite fascinated with the ports system. And this evening I suddenly had an idea, but I'm not too sure how feasible this idea is, so I'm hoping some of you guys would be willing to give me some suggestions or advice. I've been using a commercial software product for the past 4 years now; I started using it on Linux and nowadays I use it on Windows. The company behind this product provides several editions of their product, including a community edition which can be used free of charge but non-commercial use only. It does have some functional limitations which, in my opinion (but I am biased), aren't really intrusive. For example if you print some output you'll get a watermark too. Stuff like that. Even so; I strongly support this software. Like I said before I've been using it myself for the past 4 years (in all fairness: I got myself a commercial license too, which wasn't too expensive in my opinion) and even now I'm still quite passionate about this stuff. Now; I read that the ports collection provides a /truly/ free environment and doesn't shun entries which may not match the idea of free and/or open source software. So my question should be obvious: Would I be right to assume that the software product as I described it above could be a liable addition for the ports collection, or is there something I'm overlooking? Needless to say I'm obviously contacting the company behind it as well, I can say I'm in quite good terms with them, and nothing will be done without their explicit permission. But before I start on such an endeavor I'd really appreciate if you guys could confirm (or deny) if my plans are actually feasible? Am I right to conclude that the product, with the non-commercial clause I described above, could be a candidate for the ports collection or would the restriction be a huge obstacle? Thanks in advance for any comments, I'd really appreciate some advice and/or comments here. Kind regards, Peter -- .\\ S/MIME public key: http://www.catslair.org/pubkey.crt +- My semi-private Root CA: http://ssl.losoco.nl/losoco.crt ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Would software for non-commercial use be acceptable as a port?
On Sun, Jul 28, 2013 at 02:28:31AM +0200 I heard the voice of Peter Looyenga, and lo! it spake thus: Am I right to conclude that the product, with the non-commercial clause I described above, could be a candidate for the ports collection or would the restriction be a huge obstacle? There are a number of entries in ports/LEGAL along the lines of no commercial use, often with RESTRICTED or NO_CDROM or the like also set in the ports' Makefile's. Lots of examples to extrapolate from there. See also http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/porters-handbook/porting-restrictions.html -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | fulle...@over-yonder.net Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/ On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Would software for non-commercial use be acceptable as a port?
On 07/27/13 19:28, Peter Looyenga wrote: Hi gang, I've been professionally using FreeBSD for quite some time now (my company now uses 4 FreeBSD servers for web services) and during the implementation period I've become quite fascinated with the ports system. And this evening I suddenly had an idea, but I'm not too sure how feasible this idea is, so I'm hoping some of you guys would be willing to give me some suggestions or advice. I've been using a commercial software product for the past 4 years now; I started using it on Linux and nowadays I use it on Windows. The company behind this product provides several editions of their product, including a community edition which can be used free of charge but non-commercial use only. It does have some functional limitations which, in my opinion (but I am biased), aren't really intrusive. For example if you print some output you'll get a watermark too. Stuff like that. Even so; I strongly support this software. Like I said before I've been using it myself for the past 4 years (in all fairness: I got myself a commercial license too, which wasn't too expensive in my opinion) and even now I'm still quite passionate about this stuff. Now; I read that the ports collection provides a /truly/ free environment and doesn't shun entries which may not match the idea of free and/or open source software. So my question should be obvious: Would I be right to assume that the software product as I described it above could be a liable addition for the ports collection, or is there something I'm overlooking? Needless to say I'm obviously contacting the company behind it as well, I can say I'm in quite good terms with them, and nothing will be done without their explicit permission. But before I start on such an endeavor I'd really appreciate if you guys could confirm (or deny) if my plans are actually feasible? Am I right to conclude that the product, with the non-commercial clause I described above, could be a candidate for the ports collection or would the restriction be a huge obstacle? We already have a lot of non-commercial-use software in ports (usually marked RESTRICTED in the Makefile), so there certainly shouldn't be any intrinsic difficulty there. -Nathan ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
