On 10/10/18 07:20, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote: > On 10/9/18 9:56 PM, Alec Leamas wrote: >> On 09/10/18 21:46, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>>> For the benefit of its users OpenCPN should have a plugin manager to >>> distribute its plugins, so that they don't have to be packaged, and >>> hence don't have to conform to the distribution policies. >> >> Perhaps. But as it is, the plugins are basically distributed as github >> repos + some prebuilt packages for wWndows and MacOS + some debian >> packages in various shape. >> >> I have noted that the Nvidia closed-source drivers are available in the >> debian repos. From a legal point of view, isn't this similar? > > Bad example. The nvidia driver is more like non-free firmware, the core > is closed but there is still code around it to integrate it with the > system in question. Which is more or less exactly the same as this (and some other) plugins. The core is a non-free cli binary which decodes proprietary chart formats, the plugin is GUI code which wraps the binary and integrates it with opencpn. > Before spending much time debating non-free bits, I'm not trying to "debate", I'm looking for answers... > your should focus on > getting the free software components packaged properly. The only way I could think of this right now would if you could review the draft opencpn packaging despite wxsvg being stuck in debian-multimedia. Without input from any of these reviews I'm blocked. Cheers! --a
