Hi Bruno, cont...@bouml.fr wrote on Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 11:44:49AM +0100:
> I am the author of BoUML [1], in the past up to the release 4.23 I > distributed it under the GPL license, them the releases 5.x was not > free, and finally since the release 7.0 BoUML is free of use but I > decided to not distribute the sources. > > On openBSD you still distribute the old release 4.23 (the last in open > source) http://openports.se/devel/bouml > > Few days ago a user asked me to package the last release (7.9) for > openBSD 6.6 x86_64, I made it and it is available on my site, see > https://www.bouml.fr/download.html#openBSD > > That user also said me I should submit the package to the ports list on > openBSD community, but I imagine this is not compatible with your > requirements because I do not give the sources, am I wrong ? There is no simple "yes" or "no" answer. In principle, all of the following can be included in the OpenBSD ports tree: - non-free software - non-open-source freeware (like yours IIUC) - free software (either copylefted and truely free) OpenBSD developer and porter time is limited, and sometimes even inclusion of very good software gets delayed because a porter needs to come round to it. If upstream authors make users jump through hoops (like by not making their software fully free), that may or may not dampen the interest of individual porters and hence may or may not delay inclusion, in the worst case indefinitely. (For example, personally, i strongly favor fully free and open software, but several ports of software that isn't fully free do exist and are not frowned upon, unless they cause undue maintenance burden.) There is a practical problem, though. Ports development is only done on OpenBSD -current. You cannot submit a port for any -stable release, not even for the latest one (6.6 currently). In the -current branch, there is no promise whatsoever of API or even ABI stability. For example, libc tends to have an API or ABI break every few months, and these are neither scheduled, nor is there any prior warning in public. For that reason, it is *much* easier to port software to OpenBSD when source code is available. You would probably have to do a formal upstream release right after every OpenBSD API/ABI break (not sure whether there is a simpler solution). Currently, there isn't even a developer maintaining our devel/bouml port. Of course, you could maintain it yourself if you are willing to do regular testing on OpenBSD-current and willing to answer questions about the port. Then, for each upstream release, you still need to attract the interest of a developer to get the update committed. Yours, Ingo -- Ingo Schwarze <schwa...@usta.de> http://www.openbsd.org/ <schwa...@openbsd.org> http://mandoc.bsd.lv/ <schwa...@mandoc.bsd.lv>
