#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 rhughes):
Replying to [comment:13 mattdm]:
mattdm proposal part 2:
So, as the person that's going to have to implement this, I have very
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
against.
For instance:
"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
those...
"specify that there is no endorsement" -- in the search results (in which
case you're going to need to come up with a way to say "we'd prefer 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?
"Fedora-prepared educational information" -- do we have URLs to cover non-
free and patented available in all supported languages? At the moment 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.
"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.
Could someone (mattdm?) test the gnome-software in rawhide (3.21.4) and
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
action. Thanks.
--
Ticket URL: <
https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/57#comment:14>
council <
https://fedorahosted.org/council>
Fedora Council Public Tickets