I'm packaging the Urban Renewal fonts¹ but I'm not sure which license to use, even after corresponding with the author. (Packaging is easy; legal stuff is hard.) We both think that dbz-ttf-license and ms-ttf-license are pretty close to the intent of hers², but which? Or something else? Or include this as a new license? Does it matter that existing licenses refer to one specific vendor, or do we intend the terms to be "generically" applied? Our license framework does not support pointing packages to licenses that seem close. If there is a particular license with a package, the only approach is to find matching license text or to add it. But, "matching" allows substitution of the name of the copyright holder. The FreeLicense.txt isn't approved by OSI or FSF, so it has to have a -license suffix and can't be in DEFAULT_ACCEPTABLE_LICENSES. A separate issue, as Joerg points out, is to convince upstream to use an established license instead. But that's not really about pkgsrc; once they adopt an existing license, the same rules above apply.
Attachment:
pgpaeHFknVOJ3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Index, Search & Analyze Logs and other IT data in Real-Time with Splunk Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT data generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical, virtual or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business insights. Free Software Download: http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev
_______________________________________________ pkgsrc-wip-discuss mailing list pkgsrc-wip-discuss%lists.sourceforge.net@localhost https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pkgsrc-wip-discuss