Re: [new] security/paperkey

On 2023/03/04 09:00:25 +0300, Mikhail <mp39590@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 03, 2023 at 10:11:01PM +0100, Omar Polo wrote:
> > few nits on the Makefile:
> >
> > - please use https:// for the HOMEPAGE
> Done
>
> > - it's actually GPLv2+ (not *that* important)
>
> I got GPLv2 from COPYING, I searched for word 'later', but no matches
> which are significant. Where do you see that it's 'gplv2 or later'?

All the C files have the "or (at your opinion) any later version"
clausole which I *guess* it's more accurate than the COPYING file.
However, the comment in the port is an indication, if a small mistake
shows up it's not a big deal: IMHO it's more important to distinguish
between the GPL variants -GLP, LGPL, AGPL- than the "or later" part;
2/3 is an important gap tho. IANAL however ;-)

> > - I'd avoid setting SEPARATE_BUILD for autotools, it doesn't gain
> > anything really.
> Done (got this hint from https://www.openbsd.org/faq/ports/guide.html)

It's not wrong, but at the same time *I* don't feel like it's that
important. Especially since this is a modest port in size and not all
upstreams check if their stuff builds out-of-tree, so it could break
in a future update for reasons not always easy to diagnose.

> > less important, but I'd also reword the COMMENT to something along the
> > lines of "OpenPGP private key backup utility suitable for printing".
> Done
>
> > Otherwise it looks good to me; ok op@ to import it
>
> Thanks for the review, next attempt attached.

Still ok op@ to import. The license marker needs a "+", but no need
to send an updated tarball.

Thanks,

Omar Polo