On Thu, 2015-02-26 at 16:14 +0000, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 26 February 2015 at 15:30, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh@redhat.com
wrote: This may be nitpicking, but what about the cases for things that ARE free and open-source, but may still be illegal in certain jurisdictions? (Such as patent-encumbered codecs).
I'm treating that as non-free and possibly patented. In my head I couldn't call something "free and open source" if it's got patent concerns that stop you using it.
For example, installing a default MIME-type handler for files ending in .repo that allows GNOME Software to be launched and prompt you to load it if you click on such a path in a web browser. I think that would be in line with both statements.
I don't actually think that buys us anything in terms of usability. You might as well just go to the website and download the foo- release.rpm file, which is even better as it'll install the GPG key too.
It also doesn't fix the issue that when you type "steam" into gnome- software, nothing comes up. That's what we have to fix.
To be clear, I wasn't intending to state that this was a good solution to the problem, merely using it as an example to represent what I think is the intent of the Board statement.
As I said, I think it's probably worth reopening the conversation with the Council.