Re: [libreplanet-discuss] [GNU-linux-libre] QTWebengine is nonfree

[Luke]

On 01/10/2017 03:27 AM, Julie Marchant wrote:
> On 01/09/2017 09:47 PM, Luke wrote:
>> _Copyright: UNKNOWN - 286 occurrences
>> __License: BSD *(guessed)* - 1017 occurrences
>> License: *No copyright* UNKNOWN - 71 occurrences
>> _
>> File list available here:
>> http://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs/main/c/chromium-browser/chromium-browser_55.0.2883.75-1~deb8u1_copyright
>>
>> I've reached out to ungoogled-chromium as well since the project spends
>> a considerable amount of time patching, to ask what they considered to
>> be "large portions of code".
> That's only in the Jessie package. None of the licenses are indicated to
> be "guessed" in the current chromium package for Sid and Stretch:
>
> http://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs/main/c/chromium-browser/chromium-browser_55.0.2883.75-3_copyright
>
> The only things that are stated to be unknown is "copyright", i.e. who
> holds the copyright to the work. But not knowing who holds the copyright
> doesn't necessarily imply that the license is unknown.
>
Thanks for the link. I'm glad to see the situation is improving,
ungoogled-chromium also agrees that the situation has changed for the
better over the last few months. However, there still seems to be around
57 'source-is-missing' flags in sid that should be fixed:
https://lintian.debian.org/maintainer/pkg-chromium-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org.html#chromium-browser

Using ungoogled-chromium's patches would also remove pre-built binaries,
making it considerably more free than it is by default. In regards to
QTWebengine, we would need that they remove pre-built binaries as well -
the optional privacy patches would also be a big help for nonprism.

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature