https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3356
--- Comment #9 from Hans de Goede <[email protected]> 2014-09-25 10:45:01 CEST --- (In reply to comment #7) > (In reply to comment #5) > > (In reply to comment #4) > > > Can you please remind which section does this review apply for ? > > > > I would say free, since all the pipelight plugin code itself is free. The > > download silverlight of course is non-free, but that is not included in the > > packages. > Then why it's not in fedora if it's free ? > The main reason why a package denied in fedora would be allowed in our free > section is because of patented but free software. > Other reasons involve 3rd part modules with where the freedom in term of > license and binary remains preserved. > > This is not the case here because the only reason why this software is useful > is because of windows plugins (here we are still good, wine is in fedora). > Incidentally thoses plugins are proprietary (still ok, wine can run > proprietary > apps). But this software seems to even download proprietary plugins by > default! > that's not good at all for our free section! It does not download them by default, you've to enable a plugin first using: pipelight-plugin --enable PLUGIN > I would say that I've discarded winetricks from free because of that reason. Ok, so based on that maybe this should go to non free too, your call. > Now I would have the reason why downloading plugin "feature" was not spitted > into another package so this one could be kept into fedora ? It is an integral part of the upstream functionality. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
