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

[Tux99]

Quote: Michael Scherer wrote on Tue, 15 March 2011 21:30
----------------------------------------------------
> 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.

Nothing is being moved, these packages aren't in any repo yet.

We are trying to decide what the best possible solution is.

> That just bring more headaches, and more complexity.
> 
> That's not a solution.

Sorry but your answer is not a proper argument, it only gives me the
impression that you are summarily dismissing anything that you personally
don't like and after dictating how things have to be done.

Benefits of creating a separate 'tainted+non-free' as I mentioned in my
previous post:
- clear separation of packages based on free/no-free and tainted/no-tainted
status
- mirror maintainers can easily exclude tainted packages if the laws of
their country require it
- users can easily select packages according to their beliefs
(free/non-free) or legal concerns (patent issues)

Also I thought that in the debate about whether to separate 'tainted'
packages that was held here on this ML in the early days, the main
argument was that it should be easy for users and mirror maintainers to
avoid packages with patent issues if they so wish. Your decision to put
'tainted+non-free' packages in 'non-free' completely undermines that,
therefore I don't consider it a reasonable solution.

>From a packager point of view the best decision would be to put
'tainted+non-free' packages in 'tainted' since they are most likely to
have dependencies in 'tainted'.

If you don't want 'tainted+non-free' packages in 'tainted' then they might
as well go in a separate 'tainted+non-free' repository, since the added
complexity for the packager is the same regardless if they go in
'tainted+non-free' or 'non-free'.

-- 
Mageia ML Forum Gateway: http://mageia.linuxtech.net/forum/