GNU bug report logs - #52109
[PATCH] gnu: Add unrar-free.

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
To: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com>
Cc: kiasoc5 <kiasoc5 <at> disroot.org>, 52109 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Foo Chuan Wei <chuanwei.foo <at> hotmail.com>
Subject: [bug#52109] [PATCH] gnu: Add unrar-free.
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2023 11:47:07 -0500

Hi Liliana,

Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com> writes:

> Am Mittwoch, dem 04.01.2023 um 15:21 -0500 schrieb Maxim Cournoyer:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> That it is present in Trisquel says a lot about its standing with
>> FSDG.
>> 
>> [...] Guix contains free software packages contributed by its
>> contributors, not a curated list of software that have been deemed
>> useful or worthy based on the opinions of the Guix
>> committers/reviewers.

> There are different interpretations of the FSDG.  For instance, the
> fact that we are downloading the blobby kernel and patching it is by
> some regarded as iffy, but generally regarded as not an issue by Guix
> people.  Here, I'm using the point the FSDG raises with regards to
> distributions about name confusion and apply it to software.  Now
> admittedly, that's a stretch, but one that makes me personally
> uncomfortable if I'm told to sign off a commit that introduces such
> software for – in my opinion – no good reason.

I think unrar-free, if it makes libarchive easier to use via an
intuitive CLI, serves a purpose.

What we are discussing here is whether there's a problem or not with the
FSDG and the name 'unrar-free'.  Given the argument that 'unrar-free'
package could steer users toward 'unrar' non-free (which is not
available in Guix) is a bit of a stretch (as you admitted), I don't
think it's ground to refuse its inclusion in Guix.

-- 
Thanks,
Maxim

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.