Hi *, On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 1:32 AM, Christiaan Welvaart <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 30 Oct 2012, Wolfgang Bornath wrote: >> >> There has been a wide consensus for the solution to put it into >> tainted as has been said in this thread as well. There are 2 options > > Each package in non-free must be inspected case-by-case to know if it can be > distributed/used, but their licenses are valid world-wide (because copyright > is pretty much universally accepted). The packages in tainted can all be > used/distributed *if* patents on software are not considered valid in the > country where the user/mirror resides. Do you really want to mix those two?
Bad argument, as even with a separate repository these then *will* be mixed. As you cannot have "free" packages that depend on the nonfree-tainted in the free repo. Those would have to be put into nonfree-tainted as well. So nonfree-tainted will end up having "nonfree & tainted" and "free, but depends on nonfree-tainted" packages. I don't see a gain here. ciao Christian
