[MacPorts] snc/licenses modified

[MacPorts]

Changed page "snc/licenses" by snc at macports.org from 129.137.118.253*
Page URL: <http://trac.macports.org/wiki/snc/licenses>
Diff URL: <http://trac.macports.org/wiki/snc/licenses?action=diff&version=12>
Revision 12

-------8<------8<------8<------8<------8<------8<------8<------8<--------
Index: snc/licenses
=========================================================================
--- snc/licenses (version: 11)
+++ snc/licenses (version: 12)
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-= MacPorts 1.8.0 Licenses =
+= MacPorts 1.8.0 and the Introduction of Licenses =
 As it stands, every package that is to be distributed as a binary package must contain a copy of the license.  This is usually handled with the Makefiles automatically placing it along with the documentation.  Soon, MacPorts is aiming to make use of the license information.
 
 With the 1.8.0 release, there's a new field called {{{license}}}.  Like the other fields in portfiles, this one is defined by typing the field name and tabbing (as four spaces at a time) to line up with the rest of the fields.
@@ -9,48 +9,43 @@
 maintainer           snc
 ...
 }}}
-'''NOTE:''' this field is purely for informational purposes.
+'''NOTE:''' this field is presently for informational purposes. In the future, MacPorts' backend may treat a package by its most restrictive license with respect to binary distribution.
 
-Since there are no predetermined values to use with {{{license}}} it is suggested that we follow [http://www.finkproject.org/doc/packaging/policy.php#licenses Fink's approach].  To that end, here are the licenses with my commentary on how I feel they accomplish the eventual goals of automated builds and distribution of binaries.
-== GPL (Must Distribute Source Code) ==
+Since there are no predetermined values to use with {{{license}}} I suggest that we divide software into categories.  To that end, here are the categories and subsequent licenses I feel accomplish the eventual goals of automated builds and distribution of binaries.
+
+= No Binary Distribution =
+
+These licenses require that binaries are not distributed.
+
+ * [#Commercial Commercial]
+
+= Must Distribute Source and Binary =
+
+When creating binaries for this set of licenses, we must include the source code in the package.
+
+= Include Notices, Make Source Available =
+
+These licenses require that only the license and possible notices must be distributed with a binary. Of interesting note is the fact that many packages have man pages that cover the license as well. 
+
+ * Apache
+ * [#BSD BSD]
+ * Common Development and Distribution License
+ * Eclipse Public License
+ * [#GPL GPL]
+ * [#LGPL LGPL]
+ * MIT
+ * MPL
+
+== GPL ==
 The GNU [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html General Public License] has two important aspects: distribution and use.
 
-The GPL requires that source code is freely available from the same place as the binary, which is presently handled by MacPorts since it provides binaries by building them from the source (by default).  In the future, it may become necessary to download both a binary and source code for ports using this license or to have the source code bundled with the archive of the binary.
+The GPL requires that source code is freely available from the same place as the binary, which is presently handled by MacPorts since by default it provides binaries by building them from the source.  In the future, it may become necessary to provide both a binary and a source code package for ports using this license or to have the source code bundled with the archive of the binary.
 
-The license further stipulates that the library generated from the code can only be used in free projects.  Since MacPorts only handles open-source software, this aspect is not a problem.
-== ~~LGPL~~ ==
+== LGPL ==
 The GNU [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl.html Lesser General Public License] differs from the GPL by allowing generated libraries to be used in proprietary programs.  MacPorts sees these licenses as identical since we only deal with open-source software. As such, I don't believe we need this category.
-== ~~GPL-LGPL~~ ==
-This if a special case for packages where one part is licensed under the GPL (e.g. the executables) and another part is licensed under the LGPL (e.g. the libraries). I cannot find this being an important case for MacPorts as they are treated the same in MacPorts; we don't need this category.
-== BSD (Optional Source Code Distribution) ==
+
+== BSD ==
 For BSD-style licenses, including the [http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php "original" and "modified" BSD licenses] and the [http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php MIT license]. The [http://www.opensource.org/licenses/apache2.0.php Apache license] also counts as BSD. With these licenses the distribution of source code is optional.
 
-This category could be useful to keep around since it will allow less bandwidth as source code need not be distributed.  Equally likely, we can still distribute the source code if we do not with to have this special case.
-== Artistic ==
-For the [http://www.opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license-2.0.php Artistic license] and derivatives.
-
-Essentially, these licenses do not allow you to distribute modified copies.  This could prevent binary distribution for a portfile with patches involved.
-== Artistic-GPL ==
-Dual-licensed under the Artistic and GPL licenses. I believe we should keep these intacts for users: if they are commercial, the GPL is the more restrictive.  If we aim to use the {{{license}}} purely for MacPorts processing, then the Artistic license is most restrictive to us.
-== DFSG-Approved ==
-For software that meets the guidelines of the [http://www.debian.org/social_contract Debian Social Contract].
-
-This license is a little funky.
-
-Binary distribution is not a problem for MacPorts since we don't profit from distributing software, however end users may profit from selling CDs of the associated software.  The owner may then wish for a royalty.
-
-Also, there is a trick to be done with patched source code.  Essentially, if there are patches then the original source code must remain intact with patchfiles provided separately. 
-== OSI-Approved ==
-For [http://www.opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical other Open Source licenses] approved by the Open Source Initiative. One of OSI's requirements is that free distribution of binaries and sources is allowed. This value can also be used as an umbrella for dual-licensed packages.
-
-Any port in this category can be freely distributed and is not a problem for MacPorts.
-== Restrictive ==
-For restrictive licenses. Use this for packages that are available from the author in source form for free use, but don't allow free redistribution.
-== Restrictive/Distributable ==
-For restrictive licenses which permit distribution of source and binaries. Use this for packages that are available from the author in source form, permit distribution of source and binaries, but have restrictions which make them non-open source licenses.
-== /GFDL and /LDP ==
-The GNU [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/#FDL Free Documentation License] and [http://wiki.tldp.org/LdpWikiDefaultLicence Linux Documentation Project] suffixes are used if the documentation included in a package is explicitly included under one of the licenses.  This is done by appending /GFDL or /LDP, giving one of the allowed combinations: "GFDL", "GPL/GFDL", "LGPL/GFDL", "GPL/LGPL/GFDL", "LDP", or "GPL/LGPL/LDP".
 == Commercial ==
 For a port licensed under restrictive, commercial terms. Use this for commercial packages (e.g. Freeware, Shareware) which do not allow free redistribution of source or binaries.
-== Public Domain ==
-These packages don't have licenses at all, and anyone can do anything with them: The author has given up his copyright on the code.

-------8<------8<------8<------8<------8<------8<------8<------8<--------

* The IP shown here might not mean anything if the user or the server is
behind a proxy.

--
MacPorts <http://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for Mac OS

This is an automated message. Someone at http://www.macports.org/ added your email
address to be notified of changes on snc/licenses. If it was not you, please
report to .