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

Thu Mar 17 09:14:09 CET 2011

Le mardi 15 mars 2011 21:30:05, Michael Scherer a écrit :
+> Le mardi 15 mars 2011 à 20:34 +0100, Tux99 a écrit :
+> > Quote: Michael Scherer wrote on Tue, 15 March 2011 20:21
+> > 
+> > > Because some people do not care about patents and using tainted stuff,
+> > > but do care about free licenses and do care about what it bring to
+> > > them.
+> > > 
+> > > I do. Stormi do ( or seems to do ). And I think that given we decided
+> > > to
+> > > split PLF for that precise reason, there is more than 2 of us to care.
+> > > 
+> > > > Putting tainted packages in nonfree just causes more confusion
+> > > > IMHO.
+> > > 
+> > > As much as the reverse, it all depends on what you tell to people
+> > > about
+> > > the repository, what they expect and what you prefer to highlight.
+> > 
+> > That's exactly why I suggested earlier in this thread that we need an
+> > additional repo for 'tainted+non-free' packages, that's the only solution
+> > that would satisfy every preference people might have and at the same
+> > time make things clear for everyone (packagers, mirror maintainers,
+> > users).
+> 
+> Instead of moving stuff in non-free, you move them in non-free +
+> tainted. That just bring more headaches, and more complexity.
+> 
+> That's not a solution.
+
+Well, that would be a real solution if we really wanted to flag those packages 
+both as tainted and as non-free, as some people give more importance to the 
+fact that it is tainted and others to the fact that it is non-free.
+
+For now, I would propose either to put that package in non-free, explain to 
+users that non-free packages may be tainted too, and envision after Mageia 1 
+to add a new media if the current solution really doesn't work, and maybe 
+require a meta-package from tainted  OR put it in tainted, explain that 
+tainted can contain non-free packages, and require a dummy package from non-
+free, as Anssi proposed (on a second thought, I think that second option is 
+better).
+
+Can we reach a decision ? (add this question to the next packagers meeting ?)
+
+However, as the whole discussion seems to revolve around only one practical 
+package, what would be even better would be convince and help upstream to 
+solve the licensing issue (if that's feasible).
+
+Best regards
+
+Samuel Verschelde
+