On 9 April 2012 17:49, Julian H. Stacey <j...@berklix.com> wrote: >> From: Chris Rees <cr...@freebsd.org> >> >> Well, whatever he says, he can't revoke the license of what's already >> been distributed. >> >> ############################################################################ >> # Copyright (c) 2008 Rick Sanders <rfs9...@earthlink.net> # >> # # >> # Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software for any # >> # purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above # >> # copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies. # > > ... > > Exactly ! > > >> From: Mark Linimon <lini...@lonesome.com> > >> portmgr's policy is to honor removal requests, no matter the circumstances. > ................................................ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > Irresponsible. Real 'Managers' shoulder responsibility. So ... > > In /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk, define a warning variable after > NO_CDROM, NO_PACKAGE, [ RESTRICTED_FILES ], with example: > > WARNING+="Generic author tried to retrospectively withdraw sources." > # Maintainer suggest see files/... & http://... > > Allow individual ports Maintainers to indicate status of issues. > Allow individual installers to decide their Own take on issues, Not Yours ! > > - Ports wrappers belong to FreeBSD, not generic authors. > - Sources once published can't be unpublished. > (IMO No need of a new project & port name to excuse retention). > - Distfiles if not on freebsd.org site are not even our problem. > > portmgr should retain respect by dumping a foolish policy. sticking > to technical & avoiding programmers guesses & fears about laws, or > assumptions USA law controls global law or whatever else. Stay > technical. The globe has 196 countries with their own legal > jurisdictions, individual installers should be able to make their > own decision on law & risks & morality as localy appropriate.
Hi Julian, I understand your viewpoint, but given the horrible experiences certain people had on this kind of thing (you were around then, too), I think that the 'make a fork and port that instead' is perfectly reasonable. At least then the software has a maintainer. Chris _______________________________________________ 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"
