Bug#809705: general: let people use non-free software but opt-out of non-open software

2016-01-09 Thread Philippe Cerfon
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Ansgar Burchardt wrote: > Then why should one have "non-open" at all? The argument was that this > somehow brings some sort of "security" by being able to audit things > (though the license may probably still forbid you from doing so or >

Bug#809705: general: let people use non-free software but opt-out of non-open software

2016-01-06 Thread Vincent Lefevre
On 2016-01-04 23:14:11 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 07:45:37AM +, Niels Thykier wrote: > > Your second item has been brought up before with different > > focus/rationale/purpose. At least I remember there being an interest > > in splitting "non-free" into

Bug#809705: general: let people use non-free software but opt-out of non-open software

2016-01-06 Thread Ansgar Burchardt
Philippe Cerfon writes: > On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 8:45 AM, Niels Thykier wrote: >> Philippe Cerfon: >> Your second item has been brought up before with different >> focus/rationale/purpose. At least I remember there being an interest in >> splitting

Bug#809705: general: let people use non-free software but opt-out of non-open software

2016-01-05 Thread Brian May
Johannes Schauer writes: > I am talking about adding the metadata about which license code is released > under and/or which DFSG freedoms it violates as proposed by Stefano in a > machine readable way: either debtags or DEP-5 and make either or both of them > understood by apt

Bug#809705: general: let people use non-free software but opt-out of non-open software

2016-01-05 Thread Philippe Cerfon
Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: >Another one that is worth mentioning here --- which I discussed in > the > context of non-free.org with Dafydd Harries and others --- is > introducing a debtags facet to capture the reason why a package is in > non-free. I'd still say that solving that via debtags isn't

Bug#809705: general: let people use non-free software but opt-out of non-open software

2016-01-04 Thread Bas Wijnen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 07:45:37AM +, Niels Thykier wrote: > Philippe Cerfon: > > On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Christian PERRIER > > wrote: > >> Discussing infrastructure changes like what you're proposing (which I > >>

Bug#809705: general: let people use non-free software but opt-out of non-open software

2016-01-04 Thread Mehdi Dogguy
On 2016-01-03 07:35, Christian PERRIER wrote: Quoting Philippe Cerfon (philc...@gmail.com): Package: general Severity: wishlist Tags: security Hi. I think Debian has the following two problems (or rather its security conscious users) with respect to software that gets into the system: No

Bug#809705: general: let people use non-free software but opt-out of non-open software

2016-01-04 Thread Stefano Zacchiroli
On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 07:45:37AM +, Niels Thykier wrote: > Your second item has been brought up before with different > focus/rationale/purpose. At least I remember there being an interest > in splitting "non-free" into "non-free/firmware" vs. various other > non-free sub components.

Bug#809705: general: let people use non-free software but opt-out of non-open software

2016-01-04 Thread Philippe Cerfon
Hey Niels On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 8:45 AM, Niels Thykier wrote: > Philippe Cerfon: > Your second item has been brought up before with different > focus/rationale/purpose. At least I remember there being an interest in > splitting "non-free" into "non-free/firmware" vs. various

Bug#809705: general: let people use non-free software but opt-out of non-open software

2016-01-04 Thread Philippe Cerfon
Hey. On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 10:13 AM, Bas Wijnen wrote: > debian-project, or hopefully debian-devel. -project for talking about the > idea, -devel for discussing an implementation. Mehdi mentioned below that it would already land on debian-devel. So I'm not sure whether it

Bug#809705: general: let people use non-free software but opt-out of non-open software

2016-01-04 Thread Jerome BENOIT
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, On 05/01/16 08:15, Johannes Schauer wrote: > Hi, > > Quoting Stefano Zacchiroli (2016-01-04 23:14:11) >> On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 07:45:37AM +, Niels Thykier wrote: >>> Your second item has been brought up before with different >>>

Bug#809705: general: let people use non-free software but opt-out of non-open software

2016-01-04 Thread Johannes Schauer
Hi, Quoting Stefano Zacchiroli (2016-01-04 23:14:11) > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 07:45:37AM +, Niels Thykier wrote: > > Your second item has been brought up before with different > > focus/rationale/purpose. At least I remember there being an interest > > in splitting "non-free" into

Bug#809705: general: let people use non-free software but opt-out of non-open software

2016-01-04 Thread Stefano Zacchiroli
On Tue, Jan 05, 2016 at 08:15:37AM +0100, Johannes Schauer wrote: > while I would welcome this sort of information being captured using debtags, > this would not help me if I wanted to tell apt which packages are okay for me > and which ones are not because apt cannot set pin priorities according

Bug#809705: general: let people use non-free software but opt-out of non-open software

2016-01-04 Thread Johannes Schauer
Hi, Quoting Jerome BENOIT (2016-01-05 08:25:47) > On 05/01/16 08:15, Johannes Schauer wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Quoting Stefano Zacchiroli (2016-01-04 23:14:11) > >> On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 07:45:37AM +, Niels Thykier wrote: > >>> Your second item has been brought up before with different > >>>

Bug#809705: general: let people use non-free software but opt-out of non-open software

2016-01-03 Thread Philippe Cerfon
On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Christian PERRIER wrote: > Discussing infrastructure changes like what you're proposing (which I > have no advice about) should usually be done through our mailing > lists, Which one would be the appropriate list? I thought general would fit,

Bug#809705: general: let people use non-free software but opt-out of non-open software

2016-01-03 Thread Niels Thykier
Philippe Cerfon: > On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Christian PERRIER wrote: >> Discussing infrastructure changes like what you're proposing (which I >> have no advice about) should usually be done through our mailing >> lists, > Which one would be the appropriate list? > > I

Bug#809705: general: let people use non-free software but opt-out of non-open software

2016-01-02 Thread Philippe Cerfon
Package: general Severity: wishlist Tags: security Hi. I think Debian has the following two problems (or rather its security conscious users) with respect to software that gets into the system: First, more and more packages install software which sneaks around the package manager (and thus

Bug#809705: general: let people use non-free software but opt-out of non-open software

2016-01-02 Thread Christian PERRIER
Quoting Philippe Cerfon (philc...@gmail.com): > Package: general > Severity: wishlist > Tags: security > > Hi. > > I think Debian has the following two problems (or rather its security > conscious users) with respect to software that gets into the system: No idea whether what you're proposing