Factors determining binary archivability

[Joshua Root]

On 2020-9-9 05:08 , Jason Liu wrote:
> At this point, it looks like the vast majority of builds for Blender
> have either succeeded or failed, according to the status at
> https://ports.macports.org/port/blender/builds. Digging through the logs
> of the builders, I encountered this message in the "gather-archives" step:
> 
>     "blender" is not distributable because its license "gpl" conflicts
>     with license "OpenSSL" of dependency "openssl"
> 
> 
> Does this mean that the Blender port is yet another victim of The Curse
> of the OpenSSL License?

Yes (though you could equally call it the Curse of the GPL, as both are
responsible).

> Is there any way around this?
We do have Portfile options to manually indicate license compatibility,
so you could look in to whether Blender really uses OpenSSL, but I
suspect it's very likely that Blender does something involving HTTPS or
hashes at some point, which would most likely involve OpenSSL. If a
process containing GPL'd code can end up executing OpenSSL code, then
the conflict is real. That includes any python scripts that use the ssl
or hashlib modules.

- Josh