On 2009/02/11 15:29, Will Maier wrote: > Hi Aaron- > > On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 03:47:15PM -0500, Aaron W. Hsu wrote: > > Attached is a port for Petite Chez Scheme, a high-speed threaded Scheme > > interpreter. This is a rock-solid Scheme system that works great, and I > > would love to see it in Ports before the freeze. It's especially nice > > since OpenBSD is one of the officially supported platforms. > > Neat! Some comments: > > * the examples in lib/ should probably move to share/examples/petite-chez; > * there are no regress tests, so set NO_REGRESS; > * the petite binary is installed with mode 551, which is silly; > * petite.1's SYNOPSIS makes it sound like petite-chez installs a > scheme compiler, too. > > I don't feel strongly about changing the SYNOPSIS, though I think > it's misleading as-is. > > I also find the license confusing. For convenience, here's the meat: > > 1. License Grant > > Cadence Research Systems (hereinafter, Cadence) grants you > (hereinafter, Licensee) a nonexclusive license to use Petite Chez > Scheme and associated documentation (hereinafter, Licensed Product), to > combine the Licensed Product with other products to form Aggregate > Products, and to redistribute the Licensed Product or Aggregate > Products without royalty. All Aggregate Products must include the > Licensed Product in its entirety. No payment may be received by > Licensee for redistribution of the Licensed Product, although nothing > in this Agreement shall prevent Licensee from receiving payment for > other portions of Aggregate Products. Any redistribution of the > Licensed Product or Aggregate Products is subject to all restrictions > set forth in this Agreement. Licensee may not reverse compile, > disassemble, or otherwise reverse engineer the Licensed Product. > > The port currently sets PERMIT_* = Yes. Does that fit with the > above?
IMO this should have PERMIT_*_CDROM=no, "combine" is not well defined in the license and is I think ambiguous. "in its entirety" is hard since we don't actually put distfiles on the CDs. I'm not even sure about PERMIT_PACKAGE_FTP since it doesn't permit modification (the "Licensed Product" includes the "associated documentation", and the port patches this). The author may be intending something other than what is written, but that is irrelevant, what is relevant is how someone else sometime down the line might interpret it. (And that is why the standard /usr/share/misc/license.template used in OpenBSD is so good; there is very little room for legal wriggling and misinterpretation).
