I don't have much time to package http://www.wps.com/linux/ myself... but I found an overlay providing it and maybe some people would be interesting on sharing the efforts here or even proxy-maintain it :/ https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Proxy_Maintainers The current ebuilds are at: https://github.com/microcai/gentoo-zh/tree/master/app-office/wps-office (I will also CC people listed as commiter there as maybe he would be willing to proxy maintain it :)) The main issue I see for the ebuild on a first review is that it relies on bundled libqt libs... maybe that could be unbundled in some way but I couldn't try myself as I am still running the standard prebuilt tarball at my home as I needed this to open some files that libreoffice was failing to open :S Thanks a lot
This would need WPS-EULA license... but I don't understand Chinese... I am not sure if any licenses team member will know :/ https://github.com/microcai/gentoo-zh/blob/master/licenses/WPS-EULA
Created attachment 403122 [details] EULA.txt There's also opt/kingsoft/wps-office/office6/mui/default/EULA.txt included in the tarball. Not sure if mirror restriction is enough here, or if it should be fetch restriction.
Thanks! Why do you think it should even be mirror restricted? Looks like we should have no problem as soon as we don't modify the original tarball and we provide it completely. Regarding the fetch restriction... is that to conform the need of users of reading the LICENSE? Take care that in the LICENSE looks like it would be enough to simply tell people to go to the help menu and read it As a side note, I have seen nothing special is done at least for Arch people: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/wps-office/ But I haven't found it for other distributions to allow me to confirm nothing special regarding licensing is needed :(
(In reply to Pacho Ramos from comment #3) > Why do you think it should even be mirror restricted? Because of clauses like 1. 4) B.: [...] you shall ensure the end user whom you distribute the "Product" to are in the acceptance of all terms of the EULA before using the" Product"; and 5. 3): If Kingsoft provides a replaced, revised and/or upgraded edition of the "Product": [...] b) The license to the former edition shall be terminated. We cannot guarantee that all users to whom we would distribute the package have accepted the EULA. Neither could we ensure that distfiles of previous versions would be removed from mirrors after their license is terminated. > Looks like we should have no problem as soon as we don't modify the > original tarball and we provide it completely. See above. > Regarding the fetch restriction... is that to conform the need of users of > reading the LICENSE? Take care that in the LICENSE looks like it would be > enough to simply tell people to go to the help menu and read it As I said, I'm not sure if fetch restriction is needed here. @License team?
(In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #4) > We cannot guarantee that all users to whom we would distribute the package > have accepted the EULA. Neither could we ensure that distfiles of previous > versions would be removed from mirrors after their license is terminated. > [...] > As I said, I'm not sure if fetch restriction is needed here. @License team? I agree with your evaluation.
Regardless of what their terms say, they allow downloading from http://wps-community.org/download.html without explicitly accepting their license. So let's go with RESTRICT="mirror".
(In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #6) > Regardless of what their terms say, they allow downloading from > http://wps-community.org/download.html without explicitly accepting their > license. So let's go with RESTRICT="mirror". They are as copyright holders allowed to break their own licence -- we are not.
(In reply to Alexander Berntsen from comment #7) > (In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #6) > > Regardless of what their terms say, they allow downloading from > > http://wps-community.org/download.html without explicitly accepting their > > license. So let's go with RESTRICT="mirror". > > They are as copyright holders allowed to break their own licence -- we are > not. IANAL, but I don't see how we would break their license. We don't distribute the file, but the user downloads it from their site. Which they obviously allow, without any indication of the license on their download page.
(In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #8) > IANAL, but I don't see how we would break their license. We don't distribute > the file, but the user downloads it from their site. Which they obviously > allow, without any indication of the license on their download page. Oh, I see that I was being completely ambiguous -- sorry! Your conclusion in that regard is fine. I was just arguing against the "they say this but they do that" logic. In context, mirror restriction is likely fine.
OK, thanks a lot for your help :) I will work on this when I have time :S Best regards!
+*wps-office-9.1.0.4953_alpha18 (23 May 2015) + + 23 May 2015; Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> +metadata.xml, + +wps-office-9.1.0.4953_alpha18.ebuild: + Introduce WPS suite (#547372), based on the work from gentoo-zh overlay.
