Bug 203487

Summary: [PATCH] x11-clocks/wmclock :Update to version 1.0.16
Product: Ports & Packages Reporter: tkato432
Component: Individual Port(s)Assignee: John Marino <marino>
Status: Closed FIXED    
Severity: Affects Only Me CC: marino
Priority: --- Keywords: patch
Version: Latest   
Hardware: Any   
OS: Any   
Attachments:
Description Flags
x11-clocks_wmclock.diff
none
x11-clocks_wmclock.diff none

Description tkato432 2015-10-01 18:34:36 UTC
Created attachment 161620 [details]
x11-clocks_wmclock.diff
Comment 1 John Marino freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2015-10-10 15:29:34 UTC
since you are touching PORTDATA anyway, please remove it and augment PLIST_FILES or add pkg-plist instead.  PORTDATA is unwanted in general.
Comment 2 tkato432 2015-10-15 18:02:34 UTC
Created attachment 162082 [details]
x11-clocks_wmclock.diff
Comment 3 John Marino freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2015-10-16 13:21:06 UTC
I don't understand why you are commenting out the LICENSE_FILE.

It's one thing to not add a LICENSE_FILE and just use standard templates, but it's quite another to REMOVE a valid LICENSE_FILE.

This realy is wrong.  If the LICENSE_FILE is defined and it's valid, please just leave it.
Comment 4 commit-hook freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2015-10-16 13:36:05 UTC
A commit references this bug:

Author: marino
Date: Fri Oct 16 13:35:49 UTC 2015
New revision: 399471
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/399471

Log:
  x11-clocks/wmclock: Upgrade version 1.0.15 => 1.0.16

  The PORTDATA mechanism was removed (per my request).

  PR:		203487
  Submitted by:	ports fury

Changes:
  head/x11-clocks/wmclock/Makefile
  head/x11-clocks/wmclock/distinfo
  head/x11-clocks/wmclock/pkg-plist
Comment 5 John Marino freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2015-10-16 13:38:34 UTC
thanks
Comment 6 tkato432 2015-10-16 14:40:23 UTC
COPYING file consists of whole GPLv2 letter and some additional
notes by the original author. In this case, COPYING is likely be
considered as something different from the exact GPLv2 description.
Comment 7 John Marino freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2015-10-16 14:43:53 UTC
"In this case, COPYING is likely be
considered as something different from the exact GPLv2 description."


Which means LICENCE_FILE is not optional at that point; it's required.

LICENCE_FILE is the top priority over the general category of GPLv2.  If there is a difference, LICENSE_FILE wins and must be used with LICENSE.