[arch-dev-public] Repository cleanup [current] and [base] --> [core], this weekend!

Roman Kyrylych roman.kyrylych at gmail.com
Wed Sep 12 11:39:21 EDT 2007

2007/9/12, Paul Mattal <paul at mattal.com>:
> Tobias Powalowski wrote:
> > Hi
> > it's quite a long time ago we had a dev meeting, but i think there were quite
> > some agreement what [core] should be and we should start doing this soon.
> > Our next ISOs shouldn't have the big current anymore only ftp and [core].
> >
> > [non-free] repository
> > we should add a non-free repository with stuff that is not freely
> > distributable, like acroread, sun java, firmware files, flash etc.
> > this cleanup would affect [extra] and [current]
> > that way we could finally have cds of [extra] too without getting into
> > trouble.
> As I recall (because I originally supported this and then conceded that
> the other was a better plan), we decided NOT to separate the repos based
> on license/free/non-free but rather to have some way in pacman to say
> "only install items with such and such licenses"-- so not to organize
> our packages by license but rather to let the license features built
> into pacman to allow us to choose software with the licenses we want.

Licenses support in pacman is good and all that (I do like this idea),
but it does not help in case when some magazine want to create CD/DVD
with Arch repos snapshot and sell it with magazine.
Instead of crawling through all packages they should just omit
[non-free] repo, where all packages that are not allowed to sell on CD
will be placed.

> Aside from that, rest of the stuff sounds good based on what people
> said. I personally still like having a [current] with "one of each" that
> is small and portable, but I think I'm outvoted.

Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list