vlad-fbsd at acheronmedia.com
Fri Oct 28 16:45:05 UTC 2016
On 2016-10-28 18:38, Franco Fichtner wrote:
> I was talking about www/subsonic, sorry for the confusion:
This bug shows the discussion I had with the Subsonic maintainer (who
is, technically, until that patch is committed, still a maintainer) and
carries the whole context. In short, the author of Subsonic has to
specify what is the license of his product and include appropriate
license in both the distributable/downloadable tarball and relevant
As it is at the moment, it all points to it still being GPL'd, despite
his announcements on the forum post linked in the issue, because the
downloadable tarballs, at the time, I checked, still carried a README
saying it's GPL'd.
A forum post is inadequate license change and the author should know
better. His tarballs must include appropriate license whichever it is.
IMHO, the FreeBSD ports tree cannot continue to carry that port, 6.0+
onward because afaik one cannot retroactively change the licene of
previous releases, until the license is well known and port possibly
RESTRICTED if the license requires it. For example see Oracle JRE ports
that require you to manually download the distfiles and agree to
Oracle's license apriori.
More information about the freebsd-ports