On 9/3/19 4:47 AM, David Runge wrote: > Not that it is of our direct concern, but qt5-webengine seems to suffer > from unresolved questionable licensing issues, which is why e.g. > Parabola doesn't package it [1]. I don't know the specifics, but assume, > that it is due to the Chromium license [2]. > > Best, > David > > [1] https://www.parabola.nu/packages/?q=qt5- > [2] https://github.com/qt/qtwebengine/blob/5.12/LICENSE.Chromium
I mean, if we're concerned about that we should remove the chromium package first, *then* remove qt5-webengine (and electron). Since it is a complex issue, I will mostly drop links and expect interested people to read up on it, rather than giving a summary myself. The GNU FSDG considers chromium to be "not provably free": https://libreplanet.org/wiki/List_of_software_that_does_not_respect_the_Free_System_Distribution_Guidelines#chromium-browser Original chromium project bug report: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=28291 Parabola meta-bug tracking their general stance on chromium and affected packages: https://labs.parabola.nu/issues/1167 What Qt developers think about this: https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=374808#c4 https://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/qtwebengine/2017-January/000409.html -- Eli Schwartz Bug Wrangler and Trusted User
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
