> > I don't see how closed source apps would be part of our svn... > > If you want it part of the base system, it would better be licenced > > under MIT licence ... > > "base system" is a bit fuzzy. IMO, the svn repository should only > contain > open source software available as under a free license. Regarding > optional > packages (or later packages installable via the package manager), > closed > source software is fine by me, but I think I'd prefer our releases to > contain free software only, respectively at least make non-free > software an > opt-in installation option. As was said by Adrien, I'd really prefer to have the source available (even under LGPL) so it's buildable for other archs (ARM but also PPC). I didn't give up yet on the "distro" system to fetch and build as much as possible at once. François.