Allow to filter AppImages by license type (free vs non-free)

[ghbjklhv]

Feature: Version/Port that only shows/lists libre software.
Why? Mainly for hard core free software fans as well as distros like Trisquel.
Many people trust package managers to install software that is fully free'd and won't violate privacy.

---

Want to support this issue? Post a bounty on it! We accept bounties via BountySource.

[lslvr]

That is a relevant remark. Maybe there's no need of a port, just only to create categories: free and non-free software.

[UriHerrera]

This feature is possible as long as the source(s) from where Software Center would pull its data support this categorization.

[ghbjklhv]

That is a relevant remark. Maybe there's no need of a port, just only to create categories: free and non-free software.

Debian takes a very good approach, by default it only show main but users can always add non-free and contrib after installation. There are unofficial versions of Debian that do also come with non-free and contrib enabled by default.

Obviously, this probably won't be the case with Nitrux as it appears that ya'll are going more for ease-of-use over freedom. But, I still think a libre-only binary release would be helpful.

Plus, enabling users to choose after installation is always a useful tool.

TL;DR Very good idea :)

[ghbjklhv]

However, @luis-lavaire you would probably have to filter it somehow.
Since, as I understand it, the Appimage repo doesn't have non-free or contrib versions just one with everything.

But, most of the package do show if and what license they use.

[oijkhg]

What might be the best solution is to fork the Appimage repo to only show free software applications.
Unless, you can create a filter to do this for you.

Where would I go to edit where the application fetches the appimage.github.io directory?

@UriHerrera @luis-lavaire

[UriHerrera]

Currently, the Software Center is not in development, and we have plans to change its user interface, and how it works fundamentally, you can check the other open issues where we have discussed this.

The API that the Software Center was using had been deprecated which is why there hadn't been new releases and why we do not include it by default in the distribution anymore, at least until it's developed once again.

What might be the best solution is to fork the Appimage repo to only show free software applications.

As it was mentioned in the referenced issue:

Application authors are requested to specify the license in the AppStream information or in the GitHub Project; if it is there, then we display it.

Forking the AppImage directory isn't something that we'd consider doing. The Software Center can display the information that is within the AppImage, like the description, version, author, etc., and this information should include the license.

[oijkhg]

@UriHerrera The issue appears to suggest creating another binary that only show libre software.

The only other option that I can think of other than what I suggested is to create a filter.

[oijkhg]

The API that the Software Center was using had been deprecated which is why there hadn't been new releases and why we do not include it by default in the distribution anymore, at least until it's developed once again.

Does it no longer work? Where is the application data coming from?

[UriHerrera]

The API that the Software Center was using had been deprecated which is why there hadn't been new releases and why we do not include it by default in the distribution anymore, at least until it's developed once again.

Does it no longer work? Where is the application data coming from?

https://github.com/Nitrux/nx-software-center-server

It will connect, and probably would download something but I would not consider it usable. Neither the API or the Software Center were finished, and unfortunately, we are busy with other parts of the distribution to restart development of the Software Center.

Of course, if there were voluntaries we can move forward with the plans.

[UriHerrera]

Update

I've changed the title of this issue as there's no need to create a separate binary. The Software Center pulls its data from Appimagehub.com, and it provides a field for displaying the license type. So this is possible to implement.

If we add other sources to display more AppImages in the Software Center, these websites should provide an API that we can use to show this value in the UI; otherwise, the Software Center will display a fallback value when listing files from these additional sources.