https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1992 --- Comment #42 from Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede(a)gmail.com&gt; 2012-11-14 08:52:50 CET --- To me the center of the whole discussion is code versus content. Downloaders for non-free content are fine, and are often even in Fedora, but this is not a downloader for non free content, it is a downloader for non free code. And that to me clearly puts it in nonfree. As for the rules for including in rpmfusion-free (In reply to comment #37): There are 2 reasons for rpmfusions existence: 1) Fedora does not ship some fully FOSS software because of legal worries about how various laws in the US apply to the software in question, this is what rpmfusion-free is for. 2) Fedora does not ship the software because it either is not free according to Fedora's definition of free, this is what rpmfusion-nonfree is for. Although I'm sure that one could argue that 1) might somehow somewhat apply to winetricks, to me the main reason for it not going into Fedora-proper is 2), thus it belongs in nonfree. Another way of looking at this, is if the legal situation in the US would get fixed / improved, could the package then be moved into Fedora proper, and for winetricks to me the answer clearly is no and thus winetricks belongs in nonfree. NB I still hope / dream that one day we can completely get rid of rpmfusion-free, moving everything there to Fedora proper :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.