On 1/27/21 1:23 AM, Konstantin Gizdov wrote:
> I am not sure how this would be taken, but I propose we not only remove
> it from the repos, but we clean the AUR of Chromium and Chrome too and
> we enforce no one uploads any more such variants. This, I believe, is
> the only way the message will be
On 2021-01-27 08:45:53 (-0300), Giancarlo Razzolini wrote:
> If google drops the api key, yes. They said we can continue using
> them, but we don't know for how long, and they also mentioned
> reviewing quotas, which would render them unusable.
We don't have any specifics, so we will have to wait
On 27/01/2021 12:45, Giancarlo Razzolini via arch-dev-public wrote:
Em janeiro 27, 2021 5:58 David Runge via arch-dev-public escreveu:
However, I am one of the people that actually needs chromium for work
daily and that needs to rely on it for several websites that are not
supported by firefox
Em janeiro 27, 2021 5:58 David Runge via arch-dev-public escreveu:
However, I am one of the people that actually needs chromium for work
daily and that needs to rely on it for several websites that are not
supported by firefox (which I use mainly).
Me too.
I suggest we all take a deep breat
On 2021-01-26 22:18:21 (+0100), Levente Polyak via arch-dev-public wrote:
> On 1/26/21 9:53 PM, Morten Linderud via arch-dev-public wrote:
> >
> > It's dissapointing frankly.
> >
>
> Disappointing doesn't really catch it tho. If it would be just about the
> sync functionality: so be it. But crip
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 03:19:09AM +0200, Konstantin Gizdov via arch-dev-public
wrote:
> On 1/27/21 1:31 AM, Morten Linderud via arch-dev-public wrote:
> > I disagree on utilzing the AUR for an extended turf-war. Drop it from the
> > repositories and people can maintain it in the AUR. It's user co
On 1/27/21 2:43 AM, Massimiliano Torromeo wrote:
> Google might even decide that they don't want to invest resources on the sync
> infrastructure anymore and kill it altogether and it would be their right to
> do so, and not even all that surprising given the amount of dead google
> projects ove
On 1/27/21 1:31 AM, Morten Linderud via arch-dev-public wrote:
> I disagree on utilzing the AUR for an extended turf-war. Drop it from the
> repositories and people can maintain it in the AUR. It's user contributed
> stuff
> anyway and you are going to battle fork regardless for moderation purpose
In data mercoledì 27 gennaio 2021 01:12:39 CET, Konstantin Gizdov via arch-
dev-public ha scritto:
> > I mean, I also find the whole situation irritating and their arguments
> > actually insulting to our intelligence but there's no winning this.
>
> That may be, but I don't agree this is an argume
On 1/27/21 1:49 AM, Massimiliano Torromeo via arch-dev-public wrote:
> I agree with you 100% Eli.
>
> I find this whole thing of "sticking it" to Google just ridiculous. Like you
> really think they would even care?
No and that's the problem. And even if they don't, we should just give in?
> I m
On 1/27/21 1:35 AM, Eli Schwartz via arch-dev-public wrote:
> This is histrionics.
No. Please don't start with the judgmental statements. This is my honest
opinion and it's high time you gave me the respect to have my own
opinion. You don't have to agree, but that doesn't automatically make
what I
In data mercoledì 27 gennaio 2021 00:35:50 CET, Eli Schwartz via arch-dev-
public ha scritto:
> On 1/26/21 6:23 PM, Konstantin Gizdov via arch-dev-public wrote:
> > I am not sure how this would be taken, but I propose we not only remove
> > it from the repos, but we clean the AUR of Chromium and Ch
On 1/27/21 1:31 AM, Morten Linderud via arch-dev-public wrote:
> I don't think we should spend money on this.
>
EU ombudsman is a free service. Also, legal help can be found pro-bono
for things like this.
--
Regards,
Konstantin
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On 1/26/21 6:23 PM, Konstantin Gizdov via arch-dev-public wrote:
I am not sure how this would be taken, but I propose we not only remove
it from the repos, but we clean the AUR of Chromium and Chrome too and
we enforce no one uploads any more such variants. This, I believe, is
the only way the me
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 01:23:58AM +0200, Konstantin Gizdov via arch-dev-public
wrote:
> I am not sure how this would be taken, but I propose we not only remove
> it from the repos, but we clean the AUR of Chromium and Chrome too and
> we enforce no one uploads any more such variants. This, I beli
On Tue, 26 Jan 2021 22:18:21 +0100
Levente Polyak via arch-dev-public wrote:
> I'm incredibly mad that his is literally a situation where the open
> source world is soaked up and in return a big clear "screw you guys, we
> don't care" sign is raised. Well played, exploiting a monopoly position
> l
On 1/26/21 9:20 PM, Evangelos Foutras via arch-dev-public wrote:
> If people are still concerned about angering Google, even though
> there's probably nothing illegal about bundling Chrome's keys (when
> also considering the aforementioned permission from 2013) then let's
> just remove the package
On 1/26/21 9:53 PM, Morten Linderud via arch-dev-public wrote:
>
> It's dissapointing frankly.
>
Disappointing doesn't really catch it tho. If it would be just about the
sync functionality: so be it. But crippling the API usage on a level
that rips out especially things like the safe browsing fu
On Tue, 26 Jan 2021 at 22:53, Morten Linderud via arch-dev-public
wrote:
>
> Frankly, I'd love to "stick it to the Man" and bundle the chrome keys. It
> would
> place Google in an interesting position.
Same. :)
> With that said... looking at the mailing list this feels like doing Google a
> fav
Excerpts from Jerome Leclanche via arch-dev-public's message of January 26,
2021 21:04:
It sounds to me like Google doesn't want Chromium to have the full
functionality anymore; and it kind of sounds like they want Chromium
to die and Chrome to be the one-and-only.
What we want to do in response
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 09:20:04PM +0200, Evangelos Foutras via arch-dev-public
wrote:
> If people are still concerned about angering Google, even though
> there's probably nothing illegal about bundling Chrome's keys (when
> also considering the aforementioned permission from 2013) then let's
> j
That email won't be enough if it only takes google one more email to
just say "we're rescinding that previous permission".
It sounds to me like Google doesn't want Chromium to have the full
functionality anymore; and it kind of sounds like they want Chromium
to die and Chrome to be the one-and-onl
Em janeiro 26, 2021 16:20 Evangelos Foutras via arch-dev-public escreveu:
As somewhat expected, the above didn't result in any further clarification.
The only acceptable way forward for me is to switch to Chrome's keys.
We (kind of) have permission for this based on the 2013 ToS exception
allow
On Fri, 22 Jan 2021 at 10:05, Evangelos Foutras wrote:
>
> On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 at 19:28, Giancarlo Razzolini via arch-dev-public
> wrote:
> > After reading this thread [0], I think that, if we keep using their keys,
> > or even
> > start using the chrome keys, this might put Arch into muddy lega
On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 at 19:28, Giancarlo Razzolini via arch-dev-public
wrote:
> After reading this thread [0], I think that, if we keep using their keys, or
> even
> start using the chrome keys, this might put Arch into muddy legal waters and
> I don't
> think that's a good idea.
It seems others
Em janeiro 20, 2021 17:28 Anatol Pomozov via arch-dev-public escreveu:
Would it be possible to make this "Google cloud sync" functionality
optional/pluggable? i.e. the opensource Chromium package is going to
be available in the official repo. And anyone who wants to enable the
GoogleSync has to
Hi
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 12:17 PM Jelle van der Waa via arch-dev-public
wrote:
>
> On 20/01/2021 18:28, Giancarlo Razzolini via arch-dev-public wrote:
> > Em janeiro 20, 2021 13:38 Giancarlo Razzolini via arch-dev-public escreveu:
> >> I'm fine with this approach, and I hope it works for a long
On 20/01/2021 21.16, Jelle van der Waa via arch-dev-public wrote:
> Note that the Fedora maintainer noted that they will not include these
> API keys although they are readily available. [1]
There's a legal entity behind Fedora (something about a hat too) that
could be sued. It is more blurry when
On 20/01/2021 18:28, Giancarlo Razzolini via arch-dev-public wrote:
Em janeiro 20, 2021 13:38 Giancarlo Razzolini via arch-dev-public escreveu:
I'm fine with this approach, and I hope it works for a long time.
After reading this thread [0], I think that, if we keep using their
keys, or even
Em janeiro 20, 2021 13:38 Giancarlo Razzolini via arch-dev-public escreveu:
I'm fine with this approach, and I hope it works for a long time.
After reading this thread [0], I think that, if we keep using their keys, or
even
start using the chrome keys, this might put Arch into muddy legal wat
Em janeiro 19, 2021 17:08 Evangelos Foutras via arch-dev-public escreveu:
If Chrome's keys are still public in March, I would want to try and use
them in our Chromium package for however long they remain unchanged and
non-secret. If a team member thinks this is a terrible idea, please let
me
Jochen Eisinger (Director of Engineering, Chrome) has confirmed that the
killing of our API keys is a done deal. He also does not seem interested
in the slightest bit to explore possible remedies for Chromium packages.
If Chrome's keys are still public in March, I would want to try and use
the
32 matches
Mail list logo
