On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 07:44:30PM +0200, Jürgen Hötzel wrote:
On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 12:43:48PM -0400, Paul Mattal wrote:
Jürgen Hötzel wrote:
Featuritis. Another pacman feature, that should not be part of a simple lightweight package manager.
License issues do need to be handled somewhere. I think we've already chosen to handle them in pacman, by putting all that information into packages.
Having license meta-information in packages is fine. And it would also be fine to not only search for package description/name but also package license. This would allow users to search for all pdf packages distributed under GPL using "pacman -Ss"
But who needs a child proof for free software devotees, like in this scenario:
"I have to install a viewer for this proprietary PDF files. Lets try Adobes Acrobat Reader"
# pacman -S acroread do :: you agree to accept Adobes Non Free Software License [Y/N]
User: "WTF! Adobe did not release Adobes Acrobat Reader as GPL? Thank god pacman saved me from installing non-free software".
Jürgen
Sadly, there are people out there who really do think like this. They're like RMS fan boys and will only install software that is GPL or BSD licensed. I think people are more afraid of pulling in non-free dependencies though. Some people are really anal that way. I think I agree with Paul though. Let them have the feature, but let them write it. Jason