On 18/03/14 18:34, Felix Yan wrote: > Hi, > > I recently received a license from Kingsoft to redistribute the office > productivity suite "kingsoft-office", and I want your opinion about if it > looks good to us, or if any modifications have to be made. > > The product is an office suite written in C++ and Qt, including three > components: Writer, Spreadsheets and Presentation. From my own experience, it > has very good compatibility with Microsoft Office (much better than > LibreOffice, especially with newer formats like .docx files), and have > attracted 138 votes on AUR too [1]. > > Within the past one year, I've been trying and pushing them for this license, > and it's finally here. > > One more thing that has to be noted is, as the native 64-bit version of > kingsoft-office has been (temporarily, I hope) removed from their development > cycle, we have to ship the 32-bit version in [multilib] for x86_64 systems. > Luckily this won't introduce more packages as all the lib32-* dependencies it > needs are already in [multilib]. > > Below I'll paste the full text of the license. A .doc version > (the rich text version directly from Kingsoft) can be downloaded here: > https://paste.xinu.at/Mf5/ > > [1] https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/kingsoft-office >
- Distributed as a deb file - Requires libpng12 (why is that in [community]...) - I don't trust licenses with multiple obvious typos - Is linking at runtime "integrating" with other software - Are dontations to Arch counted as us making a profit from having it in our repos? - The terms indicate we are legally responsible to stop (e.g.) Manjaro redistributing this. - we have to comply with PRC export laws and restrict distribution by country Overall, that is a no from me. It is a deb, so "packaging" is no burden for its users. Allan
