[packagekit] Free and non-free filter

[Tim Lauridsen]

Richard Hughes wrote:
> For the soon to be discussed EULA licence stuff, I want to add another
> filter; "free" and "~free" based on the package licence.
>
> For example, I could do "SearchDescription available;free
> virtualisation" to get all the packages I could install for
> non-proprietary solutions. I guess we can just whitelist the GPL, GPLv2,
> GPLv2+ type strings for this and keep it nicely simple.
>
> Of course, "free" can take all the usually debates on it's meaning, but
> I take "free" to mean "FSF declared this licence as free" rather than
> "this costs nothing".
>
> The GPLv2+ matching should probably be shared somewhere in a nice
> boolean=pk_backend_license_is_free(string) matching function. We can use
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing as an initial reference, as I
> guess most of the other backends will have similar short names.
>
> So, I guess this feature is useful (it's useful to me, just so I install
> the correct free flash package). I'm guessing it's mostly trivial to get
> this information from the metadata, and so wouldn't be too hard to add.
> Correct me if I'm wrong. Comments?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Richard.
>
> _______________________________________________
> PackageKit mailing list
> PackageKit at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/packagekit
>   
yum contains the licens in metadata, so it should be no problem to add 
'free/nonfree' flag to the yum backend.


Tim