[Packaging Request] chromium-browser

Also http://libreplanet.org/wiki/List_of_software_that_does_not_respect_the_Free_System_Distribution_Guidelines#chromium-browser

Seems that chromium devs are serious about license problems:

http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=28291

And past problems seems resolved.

I am changing this to priority minor. Aklis I am changing this because according to our How to Help adding individual packages is not something that we do (usually let upstream handle it).

However, if you want to assign this task to yourself and you consider it higher priority feel free to change the priority.

This upstream bug might be important:
http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=28291

Trisquel currently doesn't pass the Ubuntu license check script which makes it harder to check that it is all free software.

Also, according to LibrePlanet [1] Chromium suggests non-free plugins (I would guess maybe Flash). This is the main issue which the Trisquel version of Abrowser fixes.

[1]: http://libreplanet.org/wiki/List_of_software_that_does_not_respect_the_Free_System_Distribution_Guidelines#chromium-browser

This page is also useful:

http://packages.debian.org/ changelogs/pool/main/c/chromium-browser/chromium-browser_22.0.1229.94~r161065-3/chromium.copyright
(warning: 1MB download, remove space from URL)

It shows the licensing of all of the Chromium source code files. A lot of them are guessed, and some of them are still unknown. There are > 70 files that are "*No copyright* UNKNOWN".

Hmm... out of all of the files that are "*No copyright* UNKNOWN", there are only a few that might actually be slightly confusing:

src/chrome/common/extensions/docs/examples/extensions/irc/servlet/src/org/chromium/IRCProxyWebSocket.java (doesn't appear to exist anymore)
src/chrome/test/data/layout_tests/* (doesn't appear to exist anymore)
src/sandbox/sandbox_poc/resource.h
src/sdch/mac/config.h
src/tools/measure_page_load_time/ie_bho/resource.h

Header files might not even be copyrightable. A lot of the other files are either trivial (e.g. one or two lines long) or are governed by the license in the directory.

I didn't run the license check script on the latest version that I checked - I used the old license check results. But I'm sure the results would be similar. Judging by the revision texts, it looks like a lot of work has been done making Chromium pass the license check as well as it already does.

User jsebean noted that Chromium supports EME by default, which is something we probably don't want in Trisquel, so this might also need to be disabled if included:

https://trisquel.info/en/forum/chromium-not-very-free