On Mon, 18 Feb 2008, w9ya@qrparci.net wrote:
More to the point: Arch *does* have packages in the binary repos with licensing provisions of much the same limitations as those quoted in the discussions here in this thread about google-earth. And I am speaking about stuff that specifically does NOT allow copying across a network for distribution purposes and/or business use et al, single machine, no laptop mobile use and so forth. AND while these packages are not allowed in Debian for the same reasons as was mentioned in the latest emails herein concerning google-earth ArchLinux DOES have them RIGHT NOW in the binary repos.
SO.... *IF* this was pulled because it has a "non-free" license, that should NOT have been such a reflexive action IMHO, again in as much as Arch has plenty of those kinds of packages already in the binary repos.
What packages are you referring to? Do you have a list? -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.