Please stop cross-posting threads: This is Hyperbola and no other project. We also have no interest to look on what others do as we have enough to look over what we can and need to do. So yes, scorched3d is a problem. No, our warmux does not include any non-free part. As response we will remove scorched3d as it is impossible to to delete the data without a complete rewrite of the compilation-process. We have as said more important things to do and that does not include a problematic package to be fixed. As we have openarena now in a very good shape adding it back as all relevant data is also in form of sources available we can remove scorched3d without loosing anything. It was original added as motivation for people and contributors. And when data is that deeply implemented (several Makefile-definitions, configurations etc.) we do not see any further advantage to keep this package. On that process we have relied earlier on Debian as is not listed in a non-free defined area (https://packages.debian.org/bookworm/scorched3d). The conclusion is now that the understanding of "free as in freedom" is surely not clear enough done as many systems have a different understanding of this and therefore we cannot rely on others.

One last point also: We won't recreate and solve problems with copyrights in the future. When a package has issues we will just remove it. We do not see our task in solving licensing-issues of other projects. We have done this in the past with packages as neverball, supertuxkart and also warmux. We won't do this any longer: The only exception is when this is an eseential package (source code), needed as dependency for sure or easy to solve with a clear way forward. Regarding tux the passage is stated as:

That means there is only the point to acknowledge the original authro when someone asks, besides surely giving credits. Those discussions as you have opened here do not help the project - when cross-posted. In fact those debates are more distraction for smaller teams as we need to bother with every little detail of a package then and therefore conclude to just remove it. If you want to patch the software, feel free doing this and provide a packaging-script for this. We would like to motivate you doing this instead of posting such threads as those do not bring more advantages in the end. It is not the task of a system(-distribution) to solve license-questions of included projects. The only conclusion from our perspective is here to remove it then. If you see a solution around this and you can provide it? Please do so. But to await from us solving points the original project-maintainers have not seen or ignoring is the wrong approach, as we won't follow those. HyperbolaBSD / Hyperbola includes the community to solve the issues and provide active maintained ports and packages, not us as small team doing all the work. There are surely relevant discussions to be done, but sorry: This is none of a relevant discussion as said. And yes: scorched3d is included in many other system-projects and surely in a even more questionable state including copyright material. So the question is quite different: Why does those projects include non-free and / or questionable data-files and references? To honor perhaps the works? Maybe, but nevertheless those quotations and references endanger the systems including those packages sooner or later. And if you want to look more deep into packaging: https://wiki.hyperbola.info/doku.php?id … e_creation
So the last question staying is: Getting something to "eat" or learn to create food? The choice is quite relevant and you are not alone when you have questions. If you prefer further cross-posting and doing such discussions, this is for sure also your own privilege and choice to do. But this does not help free and libre software, neither in parts nor in a whole on the way now done. Sorry for being that direct, but those endless debates are also to be found in earlier threads here and never brought something more besides a team-member did something about and this always ended up in more work with the awaitment that a minority is doing something for the majority. How about to reverse this concept? Dividing the problem into smaller parts so for example in reference for scorched3d every interested person look into parts to be solved? But as this was never done before also for other projects like vdrift my personal conclusion is only staying at that theoretical point. Practical it stays as it is: People await that "someone" else is solving this. So we conclude in solving this by removing those packages as the original maintainers have never done something in that relation, not done something to solve those conflicts and we have in the end therefore no interest cleaning up a mess done before.

Yes, in theory it is possible to claim those projects are "free and libre in form of the source-code" and theoretical users can execute their right to modify the rest. Correct point, But this ends in a practical halt for everything as people only use such claims instead of doing as said some practical movement forward. We have provided such with mentioned projects before with the result that Hyperbola was laughed at for modifying so harsh or insulted for being too strict. Several outcomes, all the same in the end. Our best case scenario ends up therefore in the removal, perhaps someone is willing to solve or support us in solving? Everyone reading can feel invited to get in touch: Tox, IRC or mail. Your choice: When looking into the PKGBUILD-script we have clearly used the Debian-sources and the patchset, so even the sources included also the non-free data, concluding also that Debian is using them, alike Ubuntu and every other possible derivated system using their base. Oh yes, it would be possible to report this upstream. But here we are now in the circle-discussion, ending exactly in the entry-level of my posting. We have here at Hyperbola neither the time nor the people to manage that kind of reporting upstream for packages. We have done this also in the past resulting in even more work, explanations and discussions. This is frustrating, time-consuming and as said pure distraction for a small system-project. So I hope this gives a small but clear insight for the problems and the decision for this current moment. And I have mentioned openarena exactly with the example to make a difference: We have removed this before out of the reasoning of missing sources for creating the data. We have reworked that packages and can now add it again with full sources for everything. Same would be good for scorched3d but as said: This needs quite more work as the data itself is the problem. When there is a solution we would be glad to keep scorched3d but it is neither essential nor really needed and there are surely other packages and projects in need for our attention.

Thanks for reporting therefore scorched3d, this is sufficient when done in a direct thread here.

Thread closed!