On Fri, 2017-09-29 at 11:54 -0400, Ben Rosser wrote: > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 9:36 AM, Morten W. Petersen <morphex@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > They are. That is why I would recommand, nowdays, to use the Negativo > > > repositories. The commands to use are described here: > > > > > > https://negativo17.org/nvidia-driver/ > > > > Well is this splintering of NVIDIA driver maintenance something that has > > some good reasons or is it simply something like technical purism? > > As it says on the link, there are some differences between the way the > two are packaged. However, one of the main reasons the negativo17 > repository has been popularized as an alternative is because of the > new "third party repository policy" for Fedora, which allows editions > to ship disabled third-party repositories dedicated more or less to a > single package for easier auditing. The Workstation WG wanted to > enable installation of the nvidia driver from inside GNOME Software > directly, but the policy effectively prevents RPM Fusion as currently > constituted from being included: hence the use of the negativo17 > repository as an alternative. > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Workstation/Third_party_software_proposal > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Third_Party_Repository_Policy Both those seem to say that licensing for third-party repos must still conform to Fedora standards, so I don't see how Negativo17 qualifies. poc _______________________________________________ kde mailing list -- kde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to kde-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
