> The files generated by game-data-packager are not trivially distinguishable > from non-free games obtained from Debian (doom-wad-shareware) or from > some other source (e.g. gog.com), and show up in e.g. aptitude under > > "Obsolete and Locally Created" -> games -> non-free
Unless you have your own repo, then they are completely mixed with the rest. > However, most of them are in fact "worse than non-free": they cannot be > redistributed at all without copyright infringement. > > I'm tempted to say that we should put them in some new pseudo-component > and/or pseudo-section, like maybe non-distributable/game-data-packager. > Thoughts? I'd realy like to keep the '/games' suffix, this is recognized by everyone. I would go for 'local/games'; as there may be other ways of building local packages (equivs ?) and this is short. "local" = this file can only be installed localy on a single computer. aptitude already gives a tip when you browse down 'non-free' sections; it could also give a tip about 'local' packages; https://www.debian.org/legal/licenses/index.en.html "Additionally, some software is not distributable (for example, has no license at all), even in non-free." I see that most commercial games erroneously ships .debs with section = "(free/)games". (WorldOfGoo, TicketToRide,...) If there was some officialy recommend way to ship local package; this would happen less. What do you think to propose a change in the policy ? https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html I found this, but haven't read it yet: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=704233 Alexandre