[Mageia-dev] Mirror layout, round two

Daniel Kreuter daniel.kreuter85 at googlemail.com
Sun Dec 5 18:36:36 CET 2010


On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 9:32 PM, andre999 <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.

-- 
Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Greetings

Daniel Kreuter
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </pipermail/mageia-dev/attachments/20101205/da2938d0/attachment.html>


More information about the Mageia-dev mailing list