[Mageia-dev] Repository question: where do we put non-free+tainted RPMs?

Fri Jul 8 02:54:08 CEST 2011

2011/7/8 andre999 <andr55 at laposte.net>:
+> Wolfgang Bornath a écrit :
+>>
+>> 2011/7/7 nicolas vigier<boklm at mars-attacks.org>:
+>>>
+>>> On Thu, 07 Jul 2011, Wolfgang Bornath wrote:
+>>>
+>>>> I must admit I do not understand the cause of this discussion, maybe I
+>>>> am thinking in too simple ways. Free goes in core, non-free goes in
+>>>> non-free. If a non-free software has a restrictive license it goes in
+>>>> tainted. A free software can not have a restrictive license, if it has
+>>>> it is not free and goes in tainted.
+>>>
+>>> Tainted is not about restrictive license but patents. A free software
+>>> can have a free license, but do something which is maybe patented.
+>>
+>> Yes, right. I made a mistake there - just replace "restrictive
+>> license" with "patents" in my sentence.
+>
+> "free" means that it can be redistributed with source code, with a free/open
+> source license.
+> "non-free" (in terms of the repos) means that it can be redistributed, but
+> either not with source code, according to the license + or we simply don't
+> have/can't get the source code.
+> "tainted" was mostly for packages affected to some extent by tainted
+> patents.
+> Such packages could be free or non-free, that has nothing to do with being
+> in "tainted".
+> Some discussions in the past considered that the likelihood of a patent
+> impacting a particular software (in the few countries that do accept
+> software packages to some extent, like the USA), should affect whether it
+> goes into tainted or not.  I don't know what consensus there was on this
+> point, if any.
+
+That exactly was the reason why "tainted" was created. The gathering
+of such software in one repo to make it easy for users and mirror
+maintainers in those countries to avoid them if they chose (or are
+forced) to do so.
+
+-- 
+wobo
+