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

[Florian Hubold]

Am 17.03.2011 09:14, schrieb Samuel Verschelde:
> 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 ?)
*bump*
As there was no decision reached, not even a concensus, how do we proceed now?
As there is the next package (HandBrake) which also falls under both 
categories, tainted and non-free.

The option of moving such packages to non-free, and requiring a package from 
tainted (or vice-versa)
which explains shortly via a README.urpmi about the problem, and to enable the 
missing repo,
sounds not that bad. (If you really want to go that far.)

Regards