Re: hashicorp license change

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

Thomas Klausner <wiz%NetBSD.org@localhost> writes:

> Hi!
>
> On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 09:29:33AM +0900, Iku Iwasa wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Is it OK to use "busl-1.1" as the value of LICENSE field for Business
>> Source License 1.1, according to https://spdx.org/licenses/BUSL-1.1.html?
>
> We need to add busl-1.1 to pkgsrc/licenses/busl-1.1 first, but
> otherwise that would be ok.

(I realize that the point below is a minor oversight, but just so
everybody is clear:)

My impression is that the entire point here is that busl-1.1 is not a
Free Software license (and is not Open Source or DFSG-Free).

Thus it needs to be busl-1.1-license (with a -license suffix to
indicated that it is non-Free), and not in DEFAULT_ACCEPTABLE_LICENSES.

See mk/license.mk for details.

(I don't view this as a controversial opinion; it seems very
straigthforward with no room for judgement calls.)