[Mageia-dev] Mirror layout, round two

Sun Dec 5 20:47:34 CET 2010

On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Anssi Hannula <anssi.hannula at iki.fi> wrote:
+
+> On 05.12.2010 19:36, Daniel Kreuter wrote:
+> >
+> >
+> > On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 9:32 PM, andre999 <andr55 at laposte.net
+> > <mailto:andr55 at laposte.net>> wrote:
+> >
+> >     Dale Huckeby a écrit :
+> >
+> >         On Sat, 4 Dec 2010, andre999 wrote:
+> >
+> >             John a écrit :
+> >
+> >
+> >                 On Fri, 3 Dec 2010 11:28:26 +0100
+> >                 Maarten Vanraes wrote:
+> >
+> >                     Op vrijdag 03 december 2010 10:45:05 schreef Ahmad
+> >                     Samir:
+> >                     [...]
+> >
+> >                         The kernel uses the word "tainted" when it
+> >                         detects the nvidia
+> >                         proprietary module for example, (which
+> >                         admittedly gave me a bit of
+> >                         shock the first time I saw it :)).
+> >
+> >
+> >                     Heh, i had the same reaction.
+> >
+> >                         >From all the proposed names, I think "tainted"
+> >                         is the best one, as the
+> >
+> >                         packages in there are in a "grey" zone, i.e. not
+> >                         totally illegal
+> >                         everywhere, but illegal only in some places in
+> >                         the world. And in
+> >                         reality the existence of a patent doesn't
+> >                         necessarily mean it's
+> >                         enforceable in a court of law (the only way we'd
+> >                         know for sure is if
+> >                         someone actually does try to sue)... my 0.02€
+> >                         worth :)
+> >
+> >
+> >             Generally only potentially "illegal" in some countries.
+> >             "Tainted" means contaminated, polluted. A lot stronger than
+> >             potentially "illegal". (Really only actionable in a civil
+> >             sense, not
+> >             criminally illegal, as well.)
+> >             A package could end up there due to an apparently credible
+> >             rumour,
+> >             later discredited. (Anyone remember SCO ?)
+> >
+> >
+> >         I agree. Problematic comes closer to "potentially illegal", so I
+> >         looked
+> >         up some synonyms: ambiguous, debatable, dubious,
+> >         iffy, suspect, speculative, precarious, suspicious, uncertain,
+> >         unsettled, in addition to problematic itself. Personally
+> >         I like iffy, which is both short and to the point, but I think
+> >         several
+> >         of these would do. WDYT?
+> >
+> >         Dale Huckeby
+> >
+> >     A much better set of choices.
+> >     (Thanks for looking these up.  Good idea.)
+> >
+> >     Let's remember that the question for these packages is not the
+> >     quality of their functioning - but rather the advisability to use
+> >     them, for other reasons, in some countries.
+> >     So I think that it is better to avoid words that could question the
+> >     QUALITY of the packages.
+> >
+> >     Words in the list like
+> >      ambiguous, debatable, problematic, and speculative
+> >     avoid questioning the quality ... but could be too long or too
+> formal.
+> >     Or just not catchy enough ;)
+> >     ("Iffy" might be ok - certainly catchy enough.)
+> >
+> >     Additional words I found in Roget's thesaurus, along the same lines :
+> >
+> >     Associated more with debatable :
+> >     arguable, contestable, controvertible, disputable, questionable,
+> >
+> >     Associated more with controversial :
+> >     confutable, deniable, mistakable, moot
+> >
+> >     Of these additional words, I think that "contestable", "disputable",
+> >     and "controversial" are probably closest to the SENSE of the
+> >     repositories.
+> >     But maybe too formal ?
+> >
+> >     Many of these words could be good choices.
+> >     And maybe someone will come up with some more ?
+> >
+> >     my 2 cents :)
+> >
+> >     - André
+> >
+> >
+> > What about: main, free, non-free?
+> > In main is everything what belongs to the core, free contains only
+> > packages which are under a free license and in non-free are those which
+> > aren't clear if free or not (what you mentioned earlier in this
+> discussion).
+> >
+> > All three names are as clear as possible what's meant.
+>
+> The license of the packages is not in question (they are free), the
+> patent (etc) situation is.
+>
+> --
+> Anssi Hannula
+>
+
+That's what i ment.
+
+-- 
+Mit freundlichen Grüßen
+
+Greetings
+
+Daniel Kreuter
+-------------- next part --------------
+An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
+URL: </pipermail/mageia-dev/attachments/20101205/9d87f2aa/attachment.html>
+