NO_CDROM and NO_PACKAGE set together?
yar at comp.chem.msu.su
Fri Jun 4 17:47:19 GMT 2004
I'm afraid that excessive use of parentheses makes
comprehending the text more difficult. Personally,
I prefer simpler style when writing documentation.
This variable indicates that we may not generate a binary
package of the application. For instance, the license may
disallow binary redistribution or distribution of packages
created from patched sources.
However, the port's DISTFILES may be freely mirrored on
FTP/HTTP. They may also be distributed on a CD-ROM (or
similar media) unless NO_CDROM is set as well.
This variable alone indicates that, although we are allowed
to generate binary packages, we may put neither those
packages nor the port's DISTFILES onto a CD-ROM (or similar
media) for resale. However, the binary packages and the
port's DISTFILES will still be available via FTP/HTTP.
If this variable is set along with NO_PACKAGE, only the
port's DISTFILES will be available, and only via FTP/HTTP.
Set this variable alone if the application's license permits
neither mirroring the application's DISTFILES nor distributing
the binary package in any way.
NO_CDROM or NO_PACKAGE should not be set along with RESTRICTED
since the latter variable implies the former ones.
I think that a bit of reiteration won't hurt when speaking of the
license stuff. At the same time, IMHO, your note at the beginning
can be removed safely as soon as the main paragraphs change.
> >Besides other things, the word "freely" is no longer used since
> >media distribution usually involves at least covering production
> >and shipping expences.
> "Free" doesn't imply "gratis".
Recently I met a port (mail/milter-sender) whose application's
license explicitly stated that any exchange of goods, even that to
cover expenses, was commerce. I believe that such words as "free"
must be used with caution when touching legal issues.
More information about the freebsd-ports