Re: Linux Presentation

2016-02-23 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
-- > >-- >devel mailing list >devel@lists.fedoraproject.org >http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org - -- John M. Harris, Jr. PGP Key: f2ea233509f192f98464c2e94f8f03c

Self Introduction: John M. Harris, Jr.

2016-02-14 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
I'm a developer, currently working on a project called OpenBlox. To that end, I have packaged a library used by both my project and a project which is already packaged in Fedora. You may find that review request at the link below: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308367 -- devel

Re: GPG2 as default /usr/bin/gpg

2016-02-17 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
Unless there are any issues with gpg, and to my knowledge there aren't, I can't see any important reason to default 'gpg' to 'gpg2', at least not for f24. I will say that if this is done, we need to be able to use the normal alternatives system (update-alternatives) to change what's used,

Re: 3D printing SIG

2016-03-18 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
t; Miro > I've created a wiki page here: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/3DPrinting > > Feel free to add yourselves and improve the page in any way. > As I see it, the logical next step is to create an article for the Community Blog. If you would like to coordinate on this, we

Re: 3D printing SIG

2016-03-20 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
doraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject. > org I'm definitely interested. I have added my information to the wiki page. -- John M. Harris, Jr. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists

Re: Is SELinux enforcing on the koji builders?

2019-03-24 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
What is the reason for builders running permissive, rather than with a tailored targeted policy? On March 24, 2019 11:25:14 PM EDT, Kevin Fenzi wrote: >On 3/24/19 6:57 PM, Jerry James wrote: >> I ask because the gcl build is failing on every architecture. The >gcl >> binary segfaults

Re: "Basic graphics mode" feature and criterion discussion

2019-03-26 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
I don't know what it's like with GNOME, but running KDE spin with the compositor set to use XRender APIs, I have had no issues with various Nvidia cards both without their nasty proprietary code thrown into an otherwise pristine system. On March 26, 2019 7:13:18 PM EDT, Wolfgang Ulbrich

Re: /etc/yum.repos.d -> /etc/distro.repos.d

2019-03-13 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
If anything of the like, /etc/dnf.repos.d makes more sense. These repos are not necessarily part of the distro. On March 13, 2019 11:46:12 AM EDT, Theodore Papadopoulo wrote: >On 3/13/19 4:03 PM, mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 7:50 AM, Kalev Lember >> wrote: >>> Please

Re: /etc/yum.repos.d -> /etc/distro.repos.d

2019-03-15 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
`rpm` does not care what repositories your system has available, it doesn't work with them directly. That name would make no sense. On March 15, 2019 6:31:40 AM EDT, "Samuel Rakitničan" wrote: >> If anything of the like, /etc/dnf.repos.d makes more sense. These >repos are not >> necessarily

Re: translucent gnome top bar gone in F31?

2019-09-11 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Wednesday, September 11, 2019 8:57:37 AM MST Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote: > On 9/11/19 2:18 AM, John M. Harris Jr. wrote: > > Feel free to ignore any such wording that you disagree with. We don't need > > to agree in order to discuss such things, and it's alright

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositories

2019-09-08 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Sunday, September 8, 2019 3:57:22 AM MST vvs vvs wrote: > I'm sorry, but where did you saw that I said something about i686 *kernel*? > I think that I explicitly mentioned *x86_64* kernel with i686 userland and > described why it could be beneficial for some users with limited memory. > As

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositories

2019-09-08 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Saturday, September 7, 2019 11:44:59 AM MST Victor V. Shkamerda wrote: > I totally agree with that view. Making such decisions without public > discussion is not respecting user's freedom of choice. And this list > doesn't count as a public discussion. Nobody will know about it outside a > very

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositories

2019-09-08 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Sunday, September 8, 2019 1:50:17 AM MST vvs vvs wrote: > That's nice to know Fedora's developers point of view on that subject. But > I'm not subscribing to that view. I'm with Richard Stallman. And now I > clearly see why he is opposed to OSS paradigm. Looks like I was in a wrong > place for

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositories

2019-09-08 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Sunday, September 8, 2019 7:05:39 PM MST Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 7:00 AM vvs vvs wrote: > > > > > > > I'm sorry, but where did you saw that I said something about i686 > > *kernel*? I think that I explicitly mentioned *x86_64* kernel with i686 > > userland and

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositories

2019-09-11 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Tuesday, September 10, 2019 12:41:14 PM MST Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote: > On 9/10/19 7:55 AM, vvs vvs wrote: > > > Did I? I thought that I've said that I'm using x86_64 kernel right now and > > that I have my memory stretched to the limits already. > > > > > > > But yes, I've

Re: translucent gnome top bar gone in F31?

2019-09-11 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Wednesday, September 11, 2019 12:08:53 AM MST Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 9/10/19 11:18 PM, John M. Harris Jr. wrote: > > > Feel free to ignore any such wording that you disagree with. We don't need > > to agree in order to discuss such things, and it's alright if we >

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositorieso

2019-09-10 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
Hi, I think we lost your message when you sent it. The only thing that came through was a quote of the previous few messages. - - John Harris ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Re: translucent gnome top bar gone in F31?

2019-09-11 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Tuesday, September 10, 2019 6:35:39 PM MST Jared K. Smith wrote: > On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 12:41 AM John M. Harris Jr. > > wrote: > > Further, nothing in that email is what I > > would describe as "uncivilized". I'm not asking people to necessarily > > a

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositories

2019-09-11 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Wednesday, September 11, 2019 12:28:31 AM MST Samuel Sieb wrote: > On 9/10/19 11:01 PM, John M. Harris Jr. wrote: > > > On Tuesday, September 10, 2019 9:54:50 AM MST Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > >> Sure there are... from the change page: > >> > >>

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositories

2019-09-11 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Tuesday, September 10, 2019 9:54:50 AM MST Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On 9/9/19 9:34 PM, John M. Harris Jr. wrote: > > There's no reason to drop x86 kernel builds either. > > Sure there are... from the change page: > > "The i686 kernel is of limited use as most x

Re: translucent gnome top bar gone in F31?

2019-09-09 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Monday, September 9, 2019 4:32:45 AM MST Ernestas Kulik wrote: > On Mon, 2019-09-09 at 04:26 -0700, John M. Harris Jr. wrote: > > > On Monday, September 9, 2019 3:07:54 AM MST Felipe Borges wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 11:56 AM John M. Harris Jr. &

Re: translucent gnome top bar gone in F31?

2019-09-09 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Sunday, September 8, 2019 9:59:03 PM MST Tomas Popela wrote: > On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 5:06 PM Ernestas Kulik wrote: > > On Fri, 2019-09-06 at 14:26 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I upgraded to F31 recently, and I now I noticed that the gnome top > > > bar is

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositories

2019-09-09 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Sunday, September 8, 2019 9:06:43 PM MST Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 11:44 PM John M. Harris Jr. > wrote: > > > > > > On Sunday, September 8, 2019 7:05:39 PM MST Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: > > > > > On Sun

Re: translucent gnome top bar gone in F31?

2019-09-09 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Monday, September 9, 2019 3:07:54 AM MST Felipe Borges wrote: > On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 11:56 AM John M. Harris Jr. > wrote: > > > > > > On Sunday, September 8, 2019 9:59:03 PM MST Tomas Popela wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 5:06 PM Ernestas Ku

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositories

2019-09-09 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Monday, September 9, 2019 4:43:18 AM MST Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > On 9/9/19 11:52 AM, John M. Harris Jr. wrote: > > > That's now how vulnerabilities work, and just being 64 bit doesn't solve > > any security issue. > > > ht

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositories

2019-09-09 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Monday, September 9, 2019 5:16:23 AM MST Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote: > On 9/9/19 1:47 PM, John M. Harris Jr. wrote: > > > ASLR has nothing to do with the wild claims made in that email, that > > having an x86 system will somehow taint or 'infect' other systems. >

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositories

2019-09-09 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Monday, September 9, 2019 12:09:49 PM MST vvs vvs wrote: > Ok, now I see that Fedora is just for activists. If I'm not one of them then > I don't deserve any possibility to use it and should blame myself. Thanks > for explaining it to me. Please don't let the hostilities of this list get to

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositories

2019-09-09 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Monday, September 9, 2019 6:42:35 AM MST Solomon Peachy wrote: > On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 06:22:46AM -0700, John M. Harris Jr. wrote: > > The system I'm sending this email from only has 4 GiB of memory in > > total. Does that mean that this system makes ASLR completely > >

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositories

2019-09-09 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Monday, September 9, 2019 10:29:23 AM MST Bruno Wolff III wrote: > On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 14:52:07 -, > vvs vvs wrote: > > >May be there are more interested people that we know, but they are not > >reading that list. There will just be just every man for himself and > >Fedora has

Re: translucent gnome top bar gone in F31?

2019-09-09 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Monday, September 9, 2019 8:51:48 AM MST Tomasz Torcz wrote: > On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 04:39:47AM -0700, John M. Harris Jr. wrote: > > > > > > > > > This is precisely the issue with GNOME entirely. It assumes the user > > > > shouldn't > >

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositories

2019-09-09 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Monday, September 9, 2019 8:36:45 AM MST vvs vvs wrote: > There is no either right or wrong stance here. We are discussing possible > alternatives to "just drop it" attitude. > What work should be done? Please, be more specific. Right now I'm running a > i686 userland and it works. If I would

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositories

2019-09-09 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Monday, September 9, 2019 11:58:08 AM MST vvs vvs wrote: > I would argue that it might be difficult to distinguish work needed to find > out if it was i686 specific when there already is similar bug on x86_64. > Also, it's difficult to rate bug importance for most users. As I've already > said

Re: [EXT] Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositories

2019-09-09 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Monday, September 9, 2019 1:00:51 PM MST Anderson, Charles R wrote: > On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 07:57:20PM -, vvs vvs wrote: > > > Well, thanks for sharing. > > > > I'm not complaining that nobody wants to fix things for me. I'm > > complaining because there is no possibility to fix things

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositories

2019-09-09 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Monday, September 9, 2019 12:44:42 PM MST DJ Delorie wrote: > "vvs vvs" writes: > > > Ok, now I see that Fedora is just for activists. If I'm not one of > > them then I don't deserve any possibility to use it and should blame > > myself. Thanks for explaining it to me. > > > I think you're

Re: systemd-sysusers versus containers

2019-09-16 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
Why exactly is systemd-sysusers needed here anyway? Do you not have a passwd and shadow file? On September 16, 2019 5:41:04 PM UTC, Lennart Poettering wrote: >On Mo, 16.09.19 09:45, Troy Dawson (tdaw...@redhat.com) wrote: > >> systemd-sysusers seeks to unify user creation[1]. It also has the

Re: Fedora 31 Beta Release Announcement

2019-09-17 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
What architecture are you running? On September 17, 2019 8:19:03 PM UTC, sixpack13 wrote: >just upgraded from F30 to F31 Beta *WITHOUT* any errors ! > >neat ! > >thanks Fedora People !!! >___ >devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org >To

Re: Fedora 31 Beta Release Announcement

2019-09-17 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
that we have >been trying to solve ALL of it, and it might be better aimed at >pointing at a specific subset and getting the people there to join >together. It probably won't be in Fedora since the goals of the >distribution may not match. > >> On September 17, 2019 8:50:23 PM UTC,

Re: Fedora 31 Beta Release Announcement

2019-09-17 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
and Firefox both build for i686 without issue. Further, I don't know software that requires more than 4 GiB of memory to compile. On September 17, 2019 11:15:56 PM UTC, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: >On Tue, 17 Sep 2019 at 17:28, John M. Harris, Jr. > wrote: >> >> These are generic serv

Re: Fedora 31 Beta Release Announcement

2019-09-17 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
I do mean 32 bit. Contrary to what is published in the Magazine article, x86 systems are still produced to this day, and are not unpopular. I have 14 of such systems, 4 produced within the last year. On September 17, 2019 8:50:23 PM UTC, Samuel Sieb wrote: >On 9/17/19 1:48 PM, John M. Har

Re: Fedora 31 Beta Release Announcement

2019-09-17 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
I have 14 systems that failed to update to F31 (predictably so). These are x86 systems, which previously had no major issues. I have reverted to a previous snapshot using a recovery disk. On September 17, 2019 2:04:37 PM UTC, Mohan Boddu wrote: >Fedora 31 Beta Released

Re: [EXT] Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 31 Beta Release Announcement

2019-09-18 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
t;old" stuff in Fedora (i686), but now >you want to revert/remove "new" stuff (modules) too? I'm beginning to >think that Fedora just isn't a good fit for you. > >On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 06:22:52PM +, John M. Harris, Jr. wrote: >> Removing modules is a potenti

Re: [Test-Announce] Fedora 31 Beta Release Announcement

2019-09-18 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
Removing modules is a potential solution to this, as it would simplify package management. On September 18, 2019 8:29:49 AM UTC, Petr Pisar wrote: >On 2019-09-18, Ralf Corsepius wrote: >> Error: >> Problem 1: package crypto-utils-2.5-4.fc29.x86_64 requires >> libperl.so.5.28()(64bit), but

Re: Fedora 31 Beta Release Announcement

2019-09-18 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
Agreed, especially when there is little to no call for such a thing. For example, Python 2 and Python 3 can and do coexist. i686 builds can coexist with x86_64 builds. On September 18, 2019 9:56:49 AM UTC, Kevin Kofler wrote: >John M. Harris, Jr. wrote: >> These are generic serve

Re: Fedora 31 Beta Release Announcement

2019-09-18 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
ew Jędrzejewski-Szmek" wrote: >On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 11:56:49AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> John M. Harris, Jr. wrote: >> > These are generic servers. I can provide a link to the vendor's >website >> > when I get home. It is not Dell, Lenovo or simila

Re: Fedora 31 Beta Release Announcement

2019-09-18 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
Thank you for this link, looks like there's not a lot of issues, and most are closed. On September 18, 2019 4:59:33 PM UTC, Michael Cronenworth wrote: >On 9/17/19 7:01 PM, John M. Harris, Jr. wrote: >> The thing is, i686 still works. The kernel still builds as well, >without issue

Re: systemd-sysusers versus containers

2019-09-21 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Monday, September 16, 2019 11:49:52 AM MST Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 06:45:09PM +0000, John M. Harris, Jr. wrote: > > > Why exactly is systemd-sysusers needed here anyway? Do you not have a > > passwd and shadow file? > > systemd-s

Re: Fedora 31 System-Wide Change proposal (late): No i686 Repositories

2019-09-21 Thread John M. Harris Jr.
On Friday, September 13, 2019 1:57:05 AM MST Panu Matilainen wrote: > On 9/13/19 1:38 AM, vvs vvs wrote: > > > But there should be some reason for that lack of interested volunteers in > > Fedora. Right now I'm looking at stats for other distributions which are > > not going to drop i686 any time

Re: No More i686 Kernels, No i686 Repositories

2019-09-19 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
That wouldn't work, as the systems do not support 64 bit. On September 19, 2019 8:59:55 PM UTC, Matthew Miller wrote: >On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 03:19:38PM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 13:15:08 -0700, >> You can crossgrade using dnf. I wrote about it a few weeks ago.

Re: Fedora 31 Beta Release Announcement

2019-09-19 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
We had Java in Fedora long before modules, but not having a Java module would certainly be the case in that scenario, and that'd be fine. We've been able to install multiple different Java versions on the same Fedora install for some time now, something which is not possible with modules. On

Re: RPM Fusion Bugzilla Bug 5307

2019-09-22 Thread John M. Harris Jr
dora. Fedora does not maintain RPMFusion. We literally cannot support nvidia's proprietary drivers, as.. they're proprietary. Have a good one. - - John M. Harris, Jr. Splentity ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an

Re: Defining the future of the packager workflow in Fedora

2019-10-01 Thread John M. Harris Jr
d > leave.] This is, most likely, still the case today as well. I don't know why some people think it's a good idea to move to GitHub, a platform owned by Microsoft. -- John M. Harris, Jr. Splentity ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedor

Re: Impact of dropping QEMU emulation on 32-bit hosts ? (~Fedora 33)

2019-10-02 Thread John M. Harris Jr
On Wednesday, October 2, 2019 9:42:57 AM MST Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 04:49:08PM -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > > Perhaps the same reason that many people still run i686 based hardware, > > and will be unable to use Fedora after the release of

Re: RPM Fusion Bugzilla Bug 5307

2019-09-22 Thread John M. Harris Jr
ased yet haven't been fixed. GRUB is Open Source, so I'd love to > hear the excuse for that. What errors or warnings are you talking about? - - John M. Harris, Jr. Splentity ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To u

Re: RPM Fusion Bugzilla Bug 5307

2019-09-22 Thread John M. Harris Jr
ediately > blamed for the bug despite this not being an issue on any other Linux > distro. It's an issue on several other distros. Basically, anything modern. Please file a bug report with nvidia. - - John M. Harris, Jr. Splentity ___ dev

Re: Impact of dropping QEMU emulation on 32-bit hosts ? (~Fedora 33)

2019-09-28 Thread John M. Harris Jr
ange > |: :| https://libvirt.org -o- > |: https://fstop138.berrange.com :| https://entangle-photo.org-o- > |: https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| > ___ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsu

Re: epel-8-{x86_64,ppc64le,aarch64} chroots enabled in copr

2019-09-25 Thread John M. Harris Jr
fied otherwise - the builds > will be removed after 6 months. > > Happy building! > Pavel Nice! When are we getting epel-8-i686? - - John M. Harris, Jr. Splentity ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe se

Re: Modularity and the system-upgrade path

2019-10-08 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
We could simply stop doing projects that throw wildly different versions of software into a single installation, which causes this issue. On October 8, 2019 6:23:47 PM UTC, Matthew Miller wrote: >On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 02:09:24PM -0400, Przemek Klosowski via devel >wrote: >> Having said that,

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot

2019-10-14 Thread John M. Harris Jr
an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List > Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List > Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/d

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot

2019-10-14 Thread John M. Harris Jr
ing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org > Fedora Code of Conduct: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List > Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/w

Re: Recommending proprietary software in Fedora

2019-10-14 Thread John M. Harris Jr
software policy. However, that policy does not include proprietary software. It's good that we can reference external repositories such as rpmfusion-free, in my opinion. -- John M. Harris, Jr. Splentity ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedorap

Re: Fedora 32 System-Wide Change proposal: Modules in Non-Modular Buildroot

2019-10-14 Thread John M. Harris Jr
On Sunday, October 13, 2019 11:42:41 PM MST Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 9:00 AM John M. Harris Jr > > wrote: > > On Wednesday, October 9, 2019 1:46:52 PM MST Ben Cotton wrote: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Modules_

RE: Recommending proprietary software in Fedora

2019-10-14 Thread John M. Harris Jr
is to see if it's actually alright to have this in Fedora? In my opinion, this presents a huge risk, especially as a package, and the third party software policy doesn't seem to apply to this use case. -- John M. Harris, Jr. Splentity ___ devel mai

Re: Recommending proprietary software in Fedora

2019-10-14 Thread John M. Harris Jr
On Monday, October 14, 2019 6:12:18 AM MST mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 11:49 AM, John M. Harris Jr > > wrote: > > It's good that we can > > reference external repositories such as rpmfusion-free, in my opinion. > > We actually cannot do tha

Re: Recommending proprietary software in Fedora

2019-10-15 Thread John M. Harris, Jr.
There is a difference between ignoring proprietary software, and providing installation methods for it in the distro. It is against the first of the Four Foundations, Freedom, to include these repositories. It's one thing if the user seeks out the software and installs it themselves, it's

Re: Recommending proprietary software in Fedora

2019-10-15 Thread John M. Harris Jr
On Tuesday, October 15, 2019 11:39:20 AM MST Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 05:05:51PM +0000, John M. Harris, Jr. wrote: > > There is a difference between ignoring proprietary software, and providing > > installation methods for it in the distro. It is ag

Re: Recommending proprietary software in Fedora

2019-10-15 Thread John M. Harris Jr
On Tuesday, October 15, 2019 12:16:06 PM MST Kevin Fenzi wrote: > On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 11:42:33AM -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote: > > On Tuesday, October 15, 2019 11:39:20 AM MST Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 05:05:51PM +0000, John M.