[legal] port with restrictive license

[Dmitry Marakasov]

* Marcin Cieslak (saper at saper.info) wrote:

> > software authors kindly agreed to remove revocation term (which worried
> > be the most), however other terms are in question. Could someone review
> > that license and say whether that's ok in ports, whether distfile
> > mirroring is OK and whether we should modify it to make user download
> > file for himself (like with java)?
> 
> Looks scary, but there no limitations for redistribution, even
> limited derivative work (if one constitues patches in the FreeBSD port
> as such) is allowed.

Well authors kindly changed license are removed revocation term from it.
The only thing left that worries me is that US export laws stuff - I
absolutely don't understand what that means and how we can/cannot
violate these by mirroring distfiles/packages. For now I've removed all
mirroring permissions from LICENSE_PERMS for EULA, so this should be
safe. However, I'd really like that stuff explained by someone so
mirroring could maybe be reenabled.

Is I understand, to comply with license, we need to prohibit
distribution of software into "(or to a national or resident of)
any country to which the United States has embargoed goods", which
we likely won't do thus we should not mirror the files.

-- 
Dmitry Marakasov   .   55B5 0596 FF1E 8D84 5F56  9510 D35A 80DD F9D2 F77D
amdmi3 at amdmi3.ru  ..:  jabber: amdmi3 at jabber.ru    http://www.amdmi3.ru