Created attachment 196323 [details] Patch file generated with svn diff - Add LICENSE= MIT - Replace xorg with X.org in COMMENT - Replace a space with a tab in CONFIGURE_ARGS
Hi! I'm not sure about the license, there are a multitude of COPYING-* files in the upstream source. While most of them probably are some variety of MIT perhaps we should look closer before adding it to the ports Makefile. The rest of the changes look good.
Created attachment 196450 [details] Patch file generated with svn diff
Hi Niclas, Indeed, I should have looked closer: the deleted *proto ports all had their LICENSE set to MIT, except x11-fonts/fontcacheproto and x11/trapproto. The former had its LICENSE set to BSD2CLAUSE and the latter had its LICENSE unset. Fortunately, the file COPYING-trapproto looks like a Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) variant of MIT. Moreover, COPYING-panoramixproto "is a stub file": > This package has not yet had its complete licensing > information compiled. Please see the individual source files for > details on your rights to use and modify this software. > > Please submit updated COPYING files to the Xorg bugzilla: > > https://bugs.freedesktop.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=xorg > > All licensing questions regarding this software should be directed > at the Xorg mailing list: > > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg Although the license included as a header of panoramiXproto.h looks like a variant of MIT, I can not guarantee that other files (if any) provided by this package are licensed under MIT. So, here is a second draft: • Add LICENSE= MIT BSD2CLAUSE and LICENSE_COMB= multi • Replace xorg with X.org in COMMENT • Replace a space with a tab in CONFIGURE_ARGS
Hi Niclas! I wrote to the Xorg mailing list to ask for help and Adam Jackson answered me: > Apologies, this was an error on our end. The panoramixproto module > never had any real content: > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/proto/panoramixproto > panoramiXproto.h actually came from the xineramaproto module. However > when building the unified xorgproto module we just imported everything > named *proto. > I've removed the COPYING-panoramixproto file from xorgproto, which > should prevent this confusion in the future. Thanks for bringing this > to our attention! So the file COPYING-panoramixproto which raised a last doubt (please reread Comment 3) has just been removed upstream and licensing information is complete thanks to your suggestion and Adam Jackson's help. Removal: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/proto/xorgproto/commit/2505b28a96b17ee394287a74091c42c86e2860fc Consequently, I suggest to apply the patch of Comment 2: • Add LICENSE= MIT BSD2CLAUSE and LICENSE_COMB= multi • Replace xorg with X.org in COMMENT • Replace a space with a tab in CONFIGURE_ARGS
Can you update your patch to take into account the latest version of xorgproto?
(In reply to Niclas Zeising from comment #5) Sure.
Created attachment 218910 [details] Patch file (In reply to Niclas Zeising from comment #5) Hi Niclas, • Legacy headers were removed from the package with the update to 2019.2 (r516911). Without fontcacheproto, BSD2CLAUSE is not necessary anymore. • No relevant addition since then. I have updated the patch accordingly: • Add LICENSE=MIT • Replace a space with a tab in CONFIGURE_ARGS to pet portlint • Replace a tab with a space in pkg-descr to pet portlint
Make sure the MIT license is proper for this iteration of the MIT license.
These sources confirm MIT based on other notable distributions: * OpenSUSE https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/openSUSE:Factory/xorgproto/xorgproto.spec?expand=1 * Gentoo https://packages.gentoo.org/packages/x11-base/xorg-proto * Homebrew https://formulae.brew.sh/formula/xorgproto * Debian https://salsa.debian.org/xorg-team/proto/xorgproto/-/blob/debian-unstable/debian/copyright * NetBSD http://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/pkgsrc/current/pkgsrc/x11/xorgproto/README.html * CentOS https://git.centos.org/rpms/xorg-x11-proto-devel/blob/c8/f/SPECS/xorg-x11-proto-devel.spec#_10
(In reply to Kevin Bowling from comment #9) I think it's correct, but what others call the MIT license is fuzzy since there's about a dozen variations that SPDX knows about (some of which have their own identifier). We have a MIT license file, and I need to make sure the license in that file matches. I think it does, because X is the canonical MIT license project, but I want to be sure...
A commit in branch main references this bug: URL: https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/ports/commit/?id=de0f70ed2f4f87a3e464443703e060077d40a722 commit de0f70ed2f4f87a3e464443703e060077d40a722 Author: Samy Mahmoudi <samy.mahmoudi@gmail.com> AuthorDate: 2021-06-29 02:04:16 +0000 Commit: Kevin Bowling <kbowling@FreeBSD.org> CommitDate: 2021-06-29 02:04:16 +0000 x11/xorgproto: add LICENSE and clean up Makefile PR: 230735 Approved by: x11 (verbal) x11/xorgproto/Makefile | 4 +++- x11/xorgproto/pkg-descr | 2 +- 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Thanks for your contribution!
(In reply to Warner Losh from comment #10) Sorry Warner I saw this after pressing the buttons. Let me know if I need to fix it.
(In reply to Kevin Bowling from comment #13) Just sent you an email... I've pulled the changes and will do something new if there's a mismatch. Not worth doing anything else really.
(In reply to Warner Losh from comment #14) Yea, there's 28 copies of the MIT license here (some with slight variations), but they all look the be the same as SPDX has, which is our source of truth for these things. We're all good, no further action needed.