[Dev] [RFC] Package freedom requirements clarification
mtjm at mtjm.eu
Sun Nov 25 22:44:40 GMT 2012
> i think this should be coded into PBS:
> * we'll get pkgbuild updates directly from upstream and merge them with
> our freedom-related and/or port changes
> * this can be done by automated tools so it's less boring work for us
> and the intermediate probably-unfree-steering pkgbuilds won't be
Yes, keeping our PKGBUILDs similar to the upstream makes merges easier
(seen this often on mips64el). Had a similar experience using
diff-unfree on a package with a rePKGBUILD.
> discussing freedom related issues with upstream (without trolling) is
> better. we had discussed this with encyclomundi when the syslog-ng guys
> got angry because we blacklisted them iirc, and also guestone reported a
> mislicensed art for a game that would go unnoticed if we had just
> blacklisted it.
This is another issue that will occur with any standards. Recommend
blacklisting the package, asking upstream and leaving the issue open
until there is a free package or it's known that there won't be one?
> i think it's ok but the social contract should add the clarification in
> favor of free cultural works too.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Dev