Re: [arch-dev-public] Kingsoft Office License

2014-03-18 Thread Felix Yan
On Tuesday, March 18, 2014 06:41:47 Gaetan Bisson wrote: > [2014-03-18 16:34:23 +0800] Felix Yan: > > I recently received a license from Kingsoft to redistribute the office > > productivity suite "kingsoft-office", and I want your opinion about if it > > looks good to us, or if any modifications ha

Re: [arch-dev-public] Kingsoft Office License

2014-03-18 Thread Gaetan Bisson
[2014-03-18 16:34:23 +0800] Felix Yan: > I recently received a license from Kingsoft to redistribute the office > productivity suite "kingsoft-office", and I want your opinion about if it > looks good to us, or if any modifications have to be made. I skimmed through the license and Section 2 ind

Re: [arch-dev-public] Kingsoft Office License

2014-03-18 Thread Andreas Radke
Arch philosophy is to provide an open source software distribution. We do allow exceptions where open source software is not available or in very poor shape. I can't see how this office suite would fit this. I'm generally for avoiding closed stuff wherever possible. -1 -Andy signature.asc De

Re: [arch-dev-public] Kingsoft Office License

2014-03-18 Thread Felix Yan
Thanks a lot for the feedback. I'm going to give some quick answers to what I have in mind: On Tuesday, March 18, 2014 21:31:50 Allan McRae wrote: > - Distributed as a deb file > - Requires libpng12 (why is that in [community]...) I've mentioned this to them just one day ago. Actually the PKGBUI

Re: [arch-dev-public] Kingsoft Office License

2014-03-18 Thread Allan McRae
On 18/03/14 18:34, Felix Yan wrote: > Hi, > > I recently received a license from Kingsoft to redistribute the office > productivity suite "kingsoft-office", and I want your opinion about if it > looks good to us, or if any modifications have to be made. > > The product is an office suite writte

[arch-dev-public] Kingsoft Office License

2014-03-18 Thread Felix Yan
Hi, I recently received a license from Kingsoft to redistribute the office productivity suite "kingsoft-office", and I want your opinion about if it looks good to us, or if any modifications have to be made. The product is an office suite written in C++ and Qt, including three components: Writ

[arch-dev-public] Signoff report for [testing]

2014-03-18 Thread Arch Website Notification
=== Signoff report for [testing] === https://www.archlinux.org/packages/signoffs/ There are currently: * 2 new packages in last 24 hours * 0 known bad packages * 0 packages not accepting signoffs * 4 fully signed off packages * 9 packages missing signoffs * 0 packages older than 14 days (Note: th