pkgsrc has licenses/eclipse-license, but I feel licenses/eclipse-license is suitable for only devel/eclipse. I don't understand what you mean by "suitable". Either it's the same text (with possible substitution of program name), or it isn't. It seems like the contents of licenses/eclipse-license is not the same as EPL-1.0. The content of eclipse-license does not seem to have been approved by OSI or FSF, so it seems correct that it has a -license suffix and is not in the default. Is that really the license of any current eclipse or other code? Perhaps if nothing references it eclipse-license can be garbage collected. Can I add http://opensource.org/licenses/EPL-1.0 as licenses/epl-v1.0? That seems reasonable. It should get added to DEFAULT_ACCEPTABLE_LICENSES, based on both FSF and OSI approval (but only needs one).
Description: PGP signature