On 26 February 2015 at 14:35, Josh Boyer <jwboyer(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
These are the latest designs from Allan that I've implemented in GNOME
Software in F22 and rawhide:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gnome-design-team/gnome-mockups/master/...
"The board believes that shipping repository metadata that
points at
non-free software is incompatible with Fedora's foundations"
and
"The board believes that reducing technical barriers to explicit user
choice to install third-party software (non-free or otherwise) is
compatible with Fedora's foundations."
I had trouble interpreting those two statements, given that the only
technical barrier for finding non-free or not-yet-in-fedora software
*is* repo metadata itself. I assumed the first statement actually
meant "shipping enabled repository metadata" so we don't show it by
default without some other important step.
The latter statement led to some of the disabled repo work that
Richard did, IIRC. It leaves a lot open to interpretation.
Right, as a simple proposal, would it be acceptable for a package to
install something like this into /etc/yum.repos.d:
[google-chrome]
name=google-chrome
baseurl=http://dl.google.com/linux/chrome/rpm/stable/x86_64
enabled=0
gpgcheck=1
repo_gpgcheck=1
enabled_metadata=1
gpgkey=https://dl-ssl.google.com/linux/linux_signing_key.pub
So the only time we'd access that repo is with PackageKit when
searching with gnome-software, and we'd only prompt to enable the repo
if it matched a search keyword like "chrome", and then did that with a
big dialog like the mockups warning about the perils and morality of
using nonfree software. Using dnf or yum it would be completely
invisible due to the enabled=0 line. This was basically my proposal
here:
http://blogs.gnome.org/hughsie/2015/01/09/finding-hidden-applications-wit...
which didn't seem too controversial at the time.
I imagined that we'd ship a fedora-repos-extra package which we could
pull onto just the workstation product using comps, but I'm open for
ideas.
Richard