#57: Seeking Council feedback/input on draft third party software policy
Reporter: pfrields | Owner:
Status: new | Priority: normal
Component: General | Resolution:
Keywords: workstation |
Comment (by mattdm):
Replying to [comment:14 rhughes]:
So, as the person that's going to have to implement this, I have
little idea what the above means, nor whether the upstream designs from
Allan and Jimmac are suitable. You are really going to need to elaborate
on nearly all of those points to specify something I can implement or test
Sure. I'm happy to clarify.
"should prioritize" -- this refers to the search ordering in gnome-
software, or the shell? or both? If the user searches for "chrome" are you
seriously suggesting we should show "Nomacs Image Viewer" first and
"Google Chrome" second? If you want me to return firefox when the user
searches for chrome then I'm going to need a large table of data of
translated keywords and the application-id you'd like me to return for
It refers to wherever it shows up. I am suggesting that if someone
searches for "web browser", open source web browsers be prioritized.
"Nomacs Image Viewer" seems to show up on searches for "chrome"
includes the word "chromeless" in its description; I don't see a problem
with putting ''exact'' name matches first (when other settings are such
that that result would be shown, of course). It *would* be nice if open
source alternatives (rather than random description hits) would show up as
alternatives even to exact match searches -- again, the key guidance is
that the entire reason to allow non-free software is only in the larger
context of our free software mission. If we can't figure out how to do
that, we shouldn't do it at all.
"specify that there is no endorsement" -- in the search
which case you're going to need to come up with a way to say
you use free software" in about 40x200px of space...) or in the details
page? Can we show it at the bottom under the screenshot and long
description or does it have to be some huge modal-style warning box?
I am not a designer, but I'm confident that the designers can come up with
a solution that fits within the technical constraints and satisfies our
needs. If they can't, we need to either change the technical constraints
in some clever way, or just not do it.
Again, I'm not a designer and am trying to steer clear of implementation
details, but I think a huge modal warning box would be horrible. On the
other hand, burying it in the fine print doesn't seem to advance our
goals, either. I'm sure the designers can come up with something better
than either of those.
"Fedora-prepared educational information" -- do we have
URLs to cover
non-free and patented available in all supported languages? At the
we just show a localized description explaining what nonfree software is
and allow the user to see the specific licenses (with links to the SPDX
site) for free licenses.
We can start with English and ask the translation teams to expand those. A
localized description seems like a good start, but I do think it'd would
be valuable to also have links to more information than can easily fit.
Please don't use SPDX for Fedora license tags. There is not a 1:1 mapping.
"must not show non-free search results" -- do we have to
ask the user
"your search for 'google chrome' will only show google
chrome when you
click this button [okay]" as this seems somewhat pointless.
That particular phrasing would be pointless, yes. But that's a caricature
of the request. I don't think the phrasing I actually suggested above
would be pointless at all.
Could someone (mattdm?) test the gnome-software in rawhide (3.21.4)
tell me if what I've implemented is "good enough" for this
ticket? In the
case where the .repo file is installed but not enabled we still show the
dialog to enable the nonfree source just before starting the install
Sure, I'll take a look.
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/57#comment:15>
Fedora Council Public Tickets