licensing question APSL

[Brooks Davis]

On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 08:47:02PM +0100, Volker wrote:
> On 02/14/08 20:17, Brooks Davis wrote:
> > APSL is not generally accepted in the base.  It may be acceptable in
> > certain circumstances, but strong technical justification is generally
> > required for inclusion.
> 
> Brooks,
> 
> so better put that into the ports tree?

It could go into ports without issue.  If it's functionality people
need in the base then perhaps a case could be made, but at a glance it
doesn't look like these really qualify.

-- Brooks
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/attachments/20080214/4a8ea712/attachment.pgp