[Bug 195807] [MAINTAINER] Update sysutils/zsd to 2014-12-07-c2d3662

[bugzilla-noreply at freebsd.org]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=195807

Johannes Jost Meixner <xmj at FreeBSD.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |xmj at FreeBSD.org

--- Comment #7 from Johannes Jost Meixner <xmj at FreeBSD.org> ---
Hi Fabian,

given that you're both maintainer and upstream, this shouldn't be much of a
problem to resolve. You've put the license inside zsd itself, and it's an ISC
one.
Documenting that choice has no effect on end users, given that your 'zsd' tool
is licensed as ISC regardless of whether ports/packages know off it.

ISC being among the most permissive licenses, I propose a single license tag
like so:

LICENSE= ISC

ISC is known to the ports framework, and hence attributes like 
 LICENSE_PERMS, LICENSE_GROUPS and LICENSE_NAME are set by the framework.

LICENSE_FILE is typically used in cases where there's a separate file (usually
called LICENSE, or COPYING), but again this isn't the current case with zsd. 
And the ISC license is common enough not to require setting LICENSE_TEXT.

(For reference on attributes,

https://wiki.freebsd.org/PortsLicenseInfrastructure#For_the_user
)

All consequences of licensing arise with the choice to publish a version of the
software. Documenting this choice in ports is a must to ensure users know what
they're getting: some people (or, FreeBSD derivatives) may have a policy of not
using non-permissive licenses (including all those not explicitly documented),
and in cases like this one no harm will come from documenting what was intended
at publication.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.