Talk:Licenses

From ArchWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Restore

I think the merge should be undone so that vrms-archAUR can be mentioned here. If this gets done License needs to be redirected here again. --Larivact (talk) 16:41, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

I think it can be mentioned as a tip in PKGBUILD#license as well. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 16:46, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
It doesn't really fit there. Also I think licenses are important enough to deserve a dedicated article, even if it's just a stub. --Larivact (talk) 16:51, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia is there to talk about licenses in general, the content here is written primarily from the packaging point of view so I don't see a reason to split it to a separate page. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 16:55, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
If you think it doesn't fit into PKGBUILD#license, add it to pacman/Tips_and_tricks#Utilities (or other section on that page). -- Lahwaacz (talk) 17:40, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Added it there. I think my draft now has enough content to warrant an article. --Larivact (talk) 18:09, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
For the introduction, note that caring about free software and disgusting non-free software are completely different things. Similarly, describing all licenses in general and tips for non-free software haters are two different topics which don't belong on the same page. Since Arch Linux is a pragmatic distribution, I don't think we should have a page dedicated to the latter, because it would end up comparing and recommending (Arch-based) distributions at some point. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 18:28, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
You're right, I improved the wording. I see it the opposite way, the Free software section shows that there are some packages available for Arch Linux users who prefer to avoid non-free software. If you want to prevent the page from being edited to recommend other distributions you can just lock it to cosysops. --Larivact (talk) 18:44, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
I'm with Lahwaacz. Do you realize whole Arch-based distros were started to focus on the free software in the repos only? Going back to the beginning: I think it is good that the historic stub article was moved into the PKGBUILD, because that's what matters most for this distro. Most important is to have concise, helpful steps to follow in PKGBUILD#license, so that the correct license is wired into the package. If you move half the info (links to wikipedia, etc) out again to this article, the risk is that new packagers don't click through. Perhaps your draft can be used elsewhere later. --Indigo (talk) 18:45, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
So just because there are Arch-based distros focused on a topic we cannot talk about the topic? I think packagers should be tech-savvy enough to follow a web link. --Larivact (talk) 19:22, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
The quoted Arch Linux#Pragmatism says what guides packaging for this distro. You created the Category:GNU recently. How about you use the draft for a separate article, or for a section GNU#licenses, and/or reuse some of it for the category description? --Indigo (talk) 20:05, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
You didn't answer my question. My draft has nothing to do with GNU, there are other free software licenses than the GPL. --Larivact (talk) 20:38, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
To answer your question, it's not "just because" - read the other replies again, especially the second sentence in my previous reply. The things in your draft which don't originate from PKGBUILD#license can be incorporated into other pages like pacman/Tips and tricks, following the established way of presentation, which will avoid the arguable focus on non-free software haters. Your draft is very far from the original point about restoring the content of Licenses and there are two of us already who agree that restoring it would not be a good idea, so I'd like to close this discussion. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 21:52, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Alright. --Larivact (talk) 22:24, 19 November 2018 (UTC)