Re: [arch-dev-public] Definition of non-free for repo-reorg

On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 11:25:49AM +1000, James Rayner wrote:

If we do separate "non-free" and "free" in the new repo layout, what will be the definition of "non-free"?

Will anything closed source be non-free (acroread, nvidia)? or only things that have license/patent/distribution issues, like codecs?

I still don't see the need. We've never bothered in the past and it's just making things more complicated, why bother now? -S