GPLv3-licensed ports

Indi thebeelzebubtrigger at
Thu May 20 03:29:46 UTC 2010

On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 04:51:30PM -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On May 19, 2010, at 11:54 AM, Charlie Kester wrote:
> > 
> > The ports in the devel category are especially noteworthy, since (if I understand correctly) their license will infect anything
> > built with them.
> > 
> > Is ports/LEGAL prominent enough?  Should I also add something to the pkg-descr?
> 	As an end-user I don't care about GPLv3 other than from a philosophical stance; but using GPLv3 with FreeBSD as an employee is a non-starter, so that's a good primary reason for the wiki page I think.
> 	This data should really be inside the Makefile or something similar to CATEGORIES, etc like Gentoo Linux does (at least you know what you're getting before you install a package or port). That way other non-permissive licenses could be audited before the package is installed and someone could make a decision as to whether or not they can install it either because of licensing constraints, export issues, or the like...

I'd go a step beyond that and suggest that GPL-licensed ports should
have an EULA requiring the user to type yes or no, like parts of java
and some other restrictively-licensed things.

Indulekha Sharpe

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list