[93709] trunk/dports/devel/atk/Portfile

[Joshua Root]

On 2012-5-29 12:24 , Ryan Schmidt wrote:
> 
> On May 28, 2012, at 19:14, jmr at macports.org wrote:
> 
>> Revision: 93709
>>          https://trac.macports.org/changeset/93709
>> Author:   jmr at macports.org
>> Date:     2012-05-28 17:14:22 -0700 (Mon, 28 May 2012)
>> Log Message:
>> -----------
>> atk: remove unused gtk-doc dep (#31348), use preferred license format, remove unnecessary muniversal
>>
>> Modified Paths:
>> --------------
>>    trunk/dports/devel/atk/Portfile
>>
>> Modified: trunk/dports/devel/atk/Portfile
>> ===================================================================
>> --- trunk/dports/devel/atk/Portfile	2012-05-29 00:02:18 UTC (rev 93708)
>> +++ trunk/dports/devel/atk/Portfile	2012-05-29 00:14:22 UTC (rev 93709)
>> @@ -2,14 +2,13 @@
>> # $Id$
>>
>> PortSystem              1.0
>> -PortGroup               muniversal 1.0
>>
>> name                    atk
>> version                 2.2.0
>> epoch                   2
>> set branch              [join [lrange [split ${version} .] 0 1] .]
>> categories              devel
>> -license                 LGPL-2+
>> +license                 LGPL
> 
> I thought we preferred to be as specific and accurate as possible on the license? atk's source files state:
> 
>  * This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
>  * modify it under the terms of the GNU Library General Public
>  * License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
>  * version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
> 
> If your point is that version 2 is the first version of the LGPL that existed, then that's true, but seeing "LGPL" in a portfile gives a reader the impression that the author did not bother to verify which version of the license was in use, whereas "LGPL-2+" makes it clear that this information was determined and duly recorded in the portfile.

The Guide says to leave out the version number entirely if any version
of the license can be used.

- Josh