[Dev] Parabola stance on game assets

[pribib]

Thank you, hopefully with some more opinions in a format similar to this 
a consensus can be formed.


On 28/09/18 04:43, Josh Branning wrote:
> If it were up to me, packages that;
>
> 1) Link to non-free cultural works should
> 1.1) Not be included in parabola. Or ...
> 1.2) Modified so that the non-free cultural links are removed, so that 
> the package is (or can be) included in parabola. Or...
> 1.3) Have the non-free cultural links replaced with free cultural 
> links, so that the package is (or can be) included in parabola.
> 2) Contain non-free cultural works should
> 2.1) Not be included in parabola. Or ...
> 2.2) Modified so that the non-free cultural works are removed, so that 
> the package is (or can be) included in parabola. Or...
> 2.3) Have the non-free cultural works replaced with free cultural 
> works, so that the package is (or can be) included in parabola.
>
> Hope that clears things up for you!
>
> Josh
>
>
> On 28/09/18 04:32, pribib wrote:
>> I didn't mean to respond to you specifically but what do you mean? To
>> clarify, I meant that if we are bringing the discussion to whether or
>> not software packages available in the Parabola repo should
>> recommend/provide access to obtaining non-free cultural works as its
>> primary purpose then youtube-dl should be considered as well. While the
>> argument may be made that sites accessible via youtube-dl do not always
>> provide non-free cultural works, there are almost certainly some that
>> are. From looking at the list a few of the following sites make me 
>> wonder:
>>
>>   * Steam
>>   * The sites referencing South Park
>>   * Sky Sports
>>   * Nintendo
>>   * Crunchyroll
>>   * etc
>>
>> If and when the cultural policy is clearly stated it states that the
>> decisions to remove OpenRA or patch OpenMW based upon their ability to
>> access non-free cultural works was justified then to me it would seem
>> that some similar considerations must be made for youtube-dl.
>>
>>
>> On 28/09/18 04:14, Josh Branning wrote:
>>> Theoretically speaking and following my responses to said questions,
>>> the list of supported sites for youtube-dl probably shouldn't exist in
>>> said package.
>>>
>>> Josh
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Dev mailing list
>> Dev at lists.parabola.nu
>> https://lis
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev at lists.parabola.nu
> https://lists.parabola.nu/mailman/listinfo/dev