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

[James Rayner]

On Thu, July 12, 2007 20:17, Damir Perisa wrote:
> Thursday 12 July 2007, Simo Leone wrote:
>  | 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?
>
> i agree
>
> why making all this mess?
>
> to satisfy the fundamentalists, i would suggest, that you can specify
> in pacman.conf, what licences you agree to and what licences you do
> not agree to. then pacman will know what is "allowed" to be
> installed.
> whenever a new licence comes up (with a new pkg) pacman would ask: do
> you agree to licence XYZ? licence XYZ can be found
> under /path/to/licence if you want to read it. Y/N? and then pacman
> would add this result to pacman.conf
>
> do not separate repositories acording to licences... that would make
> it quite messy.

agreed. it'd make a mess when things depend on "non-free" stuff.