Re: [gNewSense-users] Suspected non-free software and strategy to tackle it.

[Chris Andrew]

Karl,

Thanks for that.  My thoughts exactly, although I had overlooked step 3b.  I wonder whether it would be best for the people that found the suspected non-free to raise the bug report.  If/ when agreed, we would also need to edit the wiki, so that KK's 5 steps are listed on the non-free page (I suggest).

Anybody else got any thoughts?

Cheers,

Chris.

On 07/07/07, Karl Goetz <address@hidden > wrote:

Chris Andrew wrote:
> Hi, all.
>
> As the Package Freedom Verification work continues to grow (phew!), we
> are more and more likely to find suspected non-free packages
> <http://wiki.gnewsense.org/Main/SuspectedNonFree> .
>
> So that we can ensure that something is done about these packages, do
> people think it would be a good idea to file bug reports for each
> suspected package?  This way, an owner can be assigned, and progress can
> be checked.  We could then decide on and document a strategy for dealing
> with the aforementioned packages.

1.  I think it should work something like this:
2.  Non free package found
3.  Bug filed against package in gnewsense
3b. optional bug filed with debian if its still relevant to them.
4a. builder changed to not build/remove the package
OR
4b. builder changed to edit package to free it.
5.  bug marked fixed.

kk
>
> What does anyone thing?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Chris.
>
--
Karl Goetz
User of gNewSense: Free as in Freedom - http://www.gnewsense.org
Australian Ubuntu users team - http://wiki.ubuntu.com/AustralianTeam
User of Debian, The Universal Operating System - http://www.debian.org


_______________________________________________
gNewSense-users mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-users