On Sat, 2019-08-17 at 02:00 +0200, Sven-Hendrik Haase via aur-general wrote:
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 at 01:35, Josef Miegl <josef@miegl.cz> wrote:
On August 16, 2019 10:05:54 PM GMT+02:00, "Balló György via aur- general" < aur-general@archlinux.org> wrote:
anydesk, reaper, spotify, teamviewer, unity-editor and unityhub are proprietary software with restrictive license. I don't think that you can legally distribute them
Even if we could, is there a reason to flood arch repositories with these proprietary programs? In my opinion proprietary programs should be an exception, not the norm.
Josef Miegl
Whether they are proprietary or not has never been a large concern for Arch. What concerns us is whether they are useful or not and whether they'd actually be used by any amount of people. Arch is all about pragmatism.
Sometimes, binary blobs are inconvenient for us because if they break we can't fix them. However, that's an entirely separate can of worms which I don't want to open in this thread.
Bottom line: If it's legal to package and it's useful and popular software, there's really no reason not to package it.
This is the way I see it as well. Libre or open-source solutions can come along anytime to replace their proprietary counterparts, if someone or a group has enough will to do so; but until then, having the best tool available for the job, even if it is proprietary, seems like a decent idea to me.