[directory-discuss] Repositories permitting but not yet carrying non-free software

[David Seaward]

Hi all,

ownCloud Community Edition and Sandstorm.io are both free software
applications tackling the same issue (local installation of network
applications, avoiding SaaSS).

They both provide access to software repositories (stores) that
implicitly permit non-free software, but do not carry it (yet):

* https://apps.owncloud.com/content/search.php (search for proprietary
license returns no results)

* https://sandstorm.io/apps/ (none listed, but permitted, see
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/sandstorm-dev/YhB6piu6CsI )

Based on responses to my question about "community editions", am I
correct in assuming that this is acceptable, even if they do end up
listing proprietary options, since they will be clearly marked (in the
license field)?

If so, please reconsider my cautionary statement on a proposed entry
for Sandstorm at
https://directory.fsf.org/wiki?title=Z--Sandstorm&oldid=21659#tab=Details
(although this entry could also be improved by focusing on Sandstorm
the framework, not Sandstorm.io the project/service/company). I placed
it there for review because my understanding at the time was that
Firefox is not in FSD because it links to AMO, which contains
proprietary plugins (presumably not labelled).

Perhaps it should simply be placed on the main entry page (and
similarly for ownCloud)?

Thanks,
David