[arch-dev-public] Additional Package ISOs

[Jason Chu]

On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 12:00:27PM +0300, Roman Kyrylych wrote:
> 2007/9/28, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com>:
> > On 9/27/07, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 9/27/07, Andreas Radke <a.radke at arcor.de> wrote:
> > > > Am Thu, 27 Sep 2007 18:33:09 -0500
> > > > schrieb "Aaron Griffin" <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > > > Opinions, what do you guys think? I haven't really heard much comment
> > > > > on this topic so far.
> > > >
> > > > -1 from me
> > > >
> > > > Whoever will maintain such a script it will be very hard to satisfy all
> > > > license issue.
> > > > I prefer to solve the license issue first. Either let's move license
> > > > critical packages into a certain non-free repo or mark them in their
> > > > pkgbuild with some kind of a tag. I'd like to have the non-free repo
> > > > solution.
> > >
> > > I'm so confused here! The _script_ should not care at ALL about
> > > license issues, that is why the script will take a package list! It is
> > > up to the person generating the ISO or package bundle to ensure they
> > > are in compliance with any license issues, not the script.
> >
> > Yeah Dan got what I was intending.
> >
> > What I mean is a script that just uses a file that lists packages to
> > build us a nice big fat ISO. I really doubt it'd be much more than a
> > pacman --root=foo/, repo-add, and mkisofs.
> >
> > This way, through human interaction, we can specifically manage any
> > and all license issues.
> >
> 
> I don't mind about such script, of course.
> But since we're going to provide our own official OMGHUGE ISO - that
> would be we who will need to check those packages for license then.
> ;-)
> Since license support in pacman is not on the top of current
> priorities now and IMHO non-free repo is simpler aproach to solving
> such issues - I agree with Andy here.

I really don't think pacman needs to have license support.  When we create
the ISO we will have a list of packages we want to build the ISO repo from.
That list of packages won't include any packages that we aren't allowed to
distribute. Tada.

Jason
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/attachments/20070928/c7b6e2b2/attachment.pgp>