On 26 February 2015 at 14:35, Josh Boyer jwboyer@fedoraproject.org wrote:
These are the latest designs from Allan that I've implemented in GNOME Software in F22 and rawhide: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gnome-design-team/gnome-mockups/master/sof...
"The board believes that shipping repository metadata that points at non-free software is incompatible with Fedora's foundations" and "The board believes that reducing technical barriers to explicit user choice to install third-party software (non-free or otherwise) is compatible with Fedora's foundations."
I had trouble interpreting those two statements, given that the only technical barrier for finding non-free or not-yet-in-fedora software *is* repo metadata itself. I assumed the first statement actually meant "shipping enabled repository metadata" so we don't show it by default without some other important step.
The latter statement led to some of the disabled repo work that Richard did, IIRC. It leaves a lot open to interpretation.
Right, as a simple proposal, would it be acceptable for a package to install something like this into /etc/yum.repos.d:
[google-chrome] name=google-chrome baseurl=http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/rpm/stable/x86_64 enabled=0 gpgcheck=1 repo_gpgcheck=1 enabled_metadata=1 gpgkey=https://dl-ssl.google.com/linux/linux_signing_key.pub
So the only time we'd access that repo is with PackageKit when searching with gnome-software, and we'd only prompt to enable the repo if it matched a search keyword like "chrome", and then did that with a big dialog like the mockups warning about the perils and morality of using nonfree software. Using dnf or yum it would be completely invisible due to the enabled=0 line. This was basically my proposal here: http://blogs.gnome.org/hughsie/2015/01/09/finding-hidden-applications-with-g... which didn't seem too controversial at the time.
I imagined that we'd ship a fedora-repos-extra package which we could pull onto just the workstation product using comps, but I'm open for ideas.
Richard