Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
Romain Beauxis to...@rastageeks.org writes: 2012/3/18 Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org: On 03/18/2012 08:53 AM, Romain Beauxis wrote: It's a cliche comparison but still, CSS decryption is the knife and DMCA is the murder; the fact that murder is illegal does not imply that knives are. Well, the whole concept of DMCA is to make knives illegal! Please read a bit more about it before making such wrong statement here. That was a cliche, indeed. The main point remains: does using libdvdcss, for instance, for watching a DVD using a multimedia player installed in millions of other computers qualify as an circumvention of technological barriers for using a digital good in certain ways which the rightsholders do not wish to allow.? Rightsholders certainly wish to allow DVDs owners to watch them privately... The DMCA specifically forbids the distribution of tools that can be used to circumvent copy protection or other technical limitations included in the product. The same clause is included in the EU directive as well. It appears that possession of tools that can be used to circumvent technical limitations might not be illegal in all countries that have a version of DMCA, but that doesn't really help Debian. I'm not sure if it would help if all of the media players Debian distributes were crippled so that they could be used to play dvd's via libdvdcss but not copy them (or which is the tool to circumvent, the decrypter or the copier). -- Arto Jantunen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/878viwx39h@kirika.int.wmdata.fi
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On 03/19/2012 01:09 PM, Romain Beauxis wrote: 2012/3/18 Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org: On 03/18/2012 08:53 AM, Romain Beauxis wrote: It's a cliche comparison but still, CSS decryption is the knife and DMCA is the murder; the fact that murder is illegal does not imply that knives are. Well, the whole concept of DMCA is to make knives illegal! Please read a bit more about it before making such wrong statement here. That was a cliche, indeed. The main point remains: does using libdvdcss, for instance, for watching a DVD using a multimedia player installed in millions of other computers qualify as an circumvention of technological barriers for using a digital good in certain ways which the rightsholders do not wish to allow.? Providing libdvdcss may be thought as providing others with a tool that can be used to do illegal copies of DVDs (which the DMCA forbids). This has nothing to do with using libdvdcss for watching a DVD that you bought, which libdvdcss makes possible as well. If that was only me, I'd say fuck the DMCA, and let's provide it in Debian. But I'm not the only one, and others in Debian think differently. It took me a few months to understand it, but now I do, and I respect their view which is that Debian isn't the place to do such activism. Rightsholders certainly wish to allow DVDs owners to watch them privately... But they do not wish anyone to make illegal copies. libdvdcss makes it possible to do both, and that's the issue. As I was reading recently, it's always good to remember that law is a liberal art degree, not an engineering degree :-) That's unfortunately right! I think this is probably enough OT from me on this thread, sorry for the digression.. I don't think that's off-topic. :) Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f6712db.90...@debian.org
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On 03/19/2012 07:02 PM, Arto Jantunen wrote: I'm not sure if it would help if all of the media players Debian distributes were crippled so that they could be used to play dvd's via libdvdcss but not copy them (or which is the tool to circumvent, the decrypter or the copier). If a DVD isn't encrypted, you can copy it using cat. I don't think that cat can be considered a tool that is going around protections... :) So, IANAL, but IMO the decrypter is the tool to circumvent the protection. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f6716dc.7070...@debian.org
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org writes: On 03/19/2012 07:02 PM, Arto Jantunen wrote: I'm not sure if it would help if all of the media players Debian distributes were crippled so that they could be used to play dvd's via libdvdcss but not copy them (or which is the tool to circumvent, the decrypter or the copier). If a DVD isn't encrypted, you can copy it using cat. I don't think that cat can be considered a tool that is going around protections... :) So, IANAL, but IMO the decrypter is the tool to circumvent the protection. The DMCA doesn't apply for DVDs that aren't encrypted (no technical measures to circumvent). This of course doesn't mean that copying non-copy-proctected DVDs is ok, the normal copyright laws still apply. I meant the last part of my previous mail mainly as a theoretical question about where the limits actually are, but as such it can only be answered by a court and debating it on this list is fairly pointless. Considerding that it's getting replies I obviously should have left it out of the mail. -- Arto Jantunen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/874ntkwy9s@kirika.int.wmdata.fi
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On 18/03/2012 02:24, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: Which distro provides Blu-Ray playback? Even though there is libaacs and friends now... the MKBs are only publicly known till version ... what? ... 10? As long as it remains free of charge and available, you can package makemkv in non-free. --eric -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f659bdc.8000...@free.fr
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 6:35 AM, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote: Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us writes: On Saturday, March 17, 2012 21:53:18, Russ Allbery wrote: Hence the Debian patent policy. We can't just ignore things like this, nor is it responsible use of project resources to openly flaunt disobedience to laws, however ill-conceived. But neither is it Debian policy to seek out trouble when that trouble isn't forthcoming. If you do want to be part of an organization that openly disobeys stupid laws and makes a point of civil disobedience, more power to you. I personally will be cheering you on. But the Debian Project is not that organization, nor is it structured to be that organization (and carefully structuring such an organization is important). The Debian Project has other goals, which mostly require that it work within the legal framework that it has available while making public statements when that legal framework interferes with project goals. The above explains the whole reason d-m.o exists. However perhaps it also might explain the tenuous relationship d.o has with d-m.o because d.o may need to distance itself from the work d-m.o does. Yup. Exactly. Christian is taking on himself the legal risk of providing those packages, which the project as a whole can't really do. Discussion about the confusion that can be caused by some of the other packages he carries aside (and I do think that issue is real), I for one thank him for his work. It would be great if dmo would restrict itself to this, or at least separate these add-on packages from packages that are problematic. Unfortunately, dmo does not categorize his archive in a way that would allow recommending at least parts. Therefore, adding this archive to the package sources of a system remains harmful. -- regards, Reinhard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAJ0cceZiCwgdkQtW5LDrTFWwVDEUgcZvySjPZR5VoSd4mp=8...@mail.gmail.com
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On 03/18/2012 08:53 AM, Romain Beauxis wrote: It's a cliche comparison but still, CSS decryption is the knife and DMCA is the murder; the fact that murder is illegal does not imply that knives are. Well, the whole concept of DMCA is to make knives illegal! Please read a bit more about it before making such wrong statement here. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f65bdae.7030...@debian.org
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Sunday, March 18, 2012 04:51:10, Reinhard Tartler wrote: On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 6:35 AM, Russ Allbery r...@debian.org wrote: Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us writes: On Saturday, March 17, 2012 21:53:18, Russ Allbery wrote: Hence the Debian patent policy. We can't just ignore things like this, nor is it responsible use of project resources to openly flaunt disobedience to laws, however ill-conceived. But neither is it Debian policy to seek out trouble when that trouble isn't forthcoming. If you do want to be part of an organization that openly disobeys stupid laws and makes a point of civil disobedience, more power to you. I personally will be cheering you on. But the Debian Project is not that organization, nor is it structured to be that organization (and carefully structuring such an organization is important). The Debian Project has other goals, which mostly require that it work within the legal framework that it has available while making public statements when that legal framework interferes with project goals. The above explains the whole reason d-m.o exists. However perhaps it also might explain the tenuous relationship d.o has with d-m.o because d.o may need to distance itself from the work d-m.o does. Yup. Exactly. Christian is taking on himself the legal risk of providing those packages, which the project as a whole can't really do. Discussion about the confusion that can be caused by some of the other packages he carries aside (and I do think that issue is real), I for one thank him for his work. It would be great if dmo would restrict itself to this, or at least separate these add-on packages from packages that are problematic. Some public discussion with the repository maintainer about this might be warranted. Such would be worhwhile even if the outcome is not what is desired, because at least then there will be a public record of where d-m.o and d.o stand. Unfortunately, dmo does not categorize his archive in a way that would allow recommending at least parts. Therefore, adding this archive to the package sources of a system remains harmful. If d-m.o doesn't have a BTS, requesting that one be created I think is reasonable. Filing bugs on the packages in d-m.o (by whatever means is common) is reasonable. IMHO putting priority on the packages within d.o over those in d-m.o for those that understand what that choice means is reasonable. But what I don't think is realistic is requesting everyone not to use the archive at d-m.o. And I also don't think that the answer of any packages within d-m.o aren't worth debugging at all sounds really lame; I certainly wouldn't want that to be the norm for Debian as a whole. At minimum, users can and do use the d-m.o mailing list to file bugs, and they get handled, so I'd much rather that be the answer than for the bugs to simply be dropped and to point to the repo as a whole as the problem. Now that said, I also don't think it's fair that the Debian BTS has to handle the bugs introduced from an external repository. It would be nice if there was a way of clearly knowing that a package is external and telling the reporter of the bug where the bug needs to be filed instead. -- Chris -- Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201203180950.39565.chris.kna...@coredump.us
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On 03/18/2012 09:50 PM, Chris Knadle wrote: Some public discussion with the repository maintainer about this might be warranted. Such would be worhwhile even if the outcome is not what is desired, because at least then there will be a public record of where d-m.o and d.o stand. debian-devel@lists.debian.org is a public mailing list. He's free to join the list and contribute to this thread! Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f661a01.90...@debian.org
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Sunday, March 18, 2012 13:23:13, Thomas Goirand wrote: On 03/18/2012 09:50 PM, Chris Knadle wrote: Some public discussion with the repository maintainer about this might be warranted. Such would be worhwhile even if the outcome is not what is desired, because at least then there will be a public record of where d-m.o and d.o stand. debian-devel@lists.debian.org is a public mailing list. He's free to join the list and contribute to this thread! Rediculous. d-m.o has a public mailing list to discuss issues concerning the repo. What you're suggesting is that someone should to go tell Christian that there's this two-week old thread on debian-devel called d-m.o considered harmful and he's supposed to jump into that, where he can expect to enter a hostile enviornment*. I really doubt that's going to occur. * [I'm not saying [debian-devel] is hostile, just that it should be expected that it would be in this speicific instance given the subject of the thread.] -- Chris -- Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201203181648.24558.chris.kna...@coredump.us
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On 12-03-18 at 04:48pm, Chris Knadle wrote: On Sunday, March 18, 2012 13:23:13, Thomas Goirand wrote: On 03/18/2012 09:50 PM, Chris Knadle wrote: Some public discussion with the repository maintainer about this might be warranted. Such would be worhwhile even if the outcome is not what is desired, because at least then there will be a public record of where d-m.o and d.o stand. debian-devel@lists.debian.org is a public mailing list. He's free to join the list and contribute to this thread! Rediculous. d-m.o has a public mailing list to discuss issues concerning the repo. Feel free to discuss your issues with that non-Debian repository at their own mailinglist. No need to inform us that you intend to do so. Have a nice day. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Sunday, March 18, 2012 17:13:55, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: On 12-03-18 at 04:48pm, Chris Knadle wrote: On Sunday, March 18, 2012 13:23:13, Thomas Goirand wrote: On 03/18/2012 09:50 PM, Chris Knadle wrote: Some public discussion with the repository maintainer about this might be warranted. Such would be worhwhile even if the outcome is not what is desired, because at least then there will be a public record of where d-m.o and d.o stand. debian-devel@lists.debian.org is a public mailing list. He's free to join the list and contribute to this thread! Rediculous. d-m.o has a public mailing list to discuss issues concerning the repo. Feel free to discuss your issues with that non-Debian repository at their own mailinglist. No need to inform us that you intend to do so. Have a nice day. - Jonas Standard geek rudeness: cut someone's email down to where the meaning is misconstrued, then reply. -- Chris -- Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201203181745.54566.chris.kna...@coredump.us
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us wrote: On Sunday, March 18, 2012 17:13:55, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: On 12-03-18 at 04:48pm, Chris Knadle wrote: On Sunday, March 18, 2012 13:23:13, Thomas Goirand wrote: On 03/18/2012 09:50 PM, Chris Knadle wrote: Some public discussion with the repository maintainer about this might be warranted. Such would be worhwhile even if the outcome is not what is desired, because at least then there will be a public record of where d-m.o and d.o stand. debian-devel@lists.debian.org is a public mailing list. He's free to join the list and contribute to this thread! Rediculous. d-m.o has a public mailing list to discuss issues concerning the repo. Feel free to discuss your issues with that non-Debian repository at their own mailinglist. No need to inform us that you intend to do so. Have a nice day. - Jonas Standard geek rudeness: cut someone's email down to where the meaning is misconstrued, then reply. -- Chris -- Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201203181745.54566.chris.kna...@coredump.us Note that Christian Marillat is a Debian Developer. He should be subscribed to this list. -- ~ Andres -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/capm41npsuhyb1oj5_2+xfjx8gey+qeetvzptzhymca28kzp...@mail.gmail.com
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
Andres Mejia amejia...@gmail.com writes: Note that Christian Marillat is a Debian Developer. He should be subscribed to this list. There is no requirement that a Debian Developer be subscribed to debian-devel, only debian-devel-announce. If I were Christian and saw a thread in debian-devel, even assuming I was reading it, with a subject header of X considered harmful, where X is something that I put a lot of time and energy into, and I was feeling wise that day and made the right decision on how to invest my time, I would add a filter rule sending the whole thread to /dev/null and go on with my life. If I were feeling foolish, I'd engage instead, but I'd probably just waste my time and energy. If someone wanted to do something productive about this, it would look more like following up on Zack's summary of what would make a useful disclaimer for the front of debian-multimedia.org, combined with possibly making a list of packages in d-m.o that are no longer useful because they've been superseded by packages in Debian proper and which may be good removal candidates from that archive. And then bring that up with Christian directly, and politely. Some gratitude for taking a legal risk for Debian users who want to have packages of multimedia software that Debian cannot distribute directly would be nice too. I realize that the folks working on multimedia packages in Debian are probably fairly frustrated at this point by user confusion and misdirected bug reports, but Christian isn't doing the work he's doing just to make you angry or your lives difficult, and that work really does serve a purpose, even if parts of it may be buggy. It's possible to disagree without being disagreeable. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87obrtv8ze@windlord.stanford.edu
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
2012/3/18 Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org: On 03/18/2012 08:53 AM, Romain Beauxis wrote: It's a cliche comparison but still, CSS decryption is the knife and DMCA is the murder; the fact that murder is illegal does not imply that knives are. Well, the whole concept of DMCA is to make knives illegal! Please read a bit more about it before making such wrong statement here. That was a cliche, indeed. The main point remains: does using libdvdcss, for instance, for watching a DVD using a multimedia player installed in millions of other computers qualify as an circumvention of technological barriers for using a digital good in certain ways which the rightsholders do not wish to allow.? Rightsholders certainly wish to allow DVDs owners to watch them privately... As I was reading recently, it's always good to remember that law is a liberal art degree, not an engineering degree :-) I think this is probably enough OT from me on this thread, sorry for the digression.. Romain -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CABWZ6OS6Ldyac3BHw1KcW0Q8e26mJrwvNRuv+AHx=64cO=v...@mail.gmail.com
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org writes: On 03/17/2012 06:11 AM, Romain Beauxis wrote: 2012/3/11 Mike Hommey m...@glandium.org The problem is: decss is illegal in very much more than just the US. This is a very different situation. Orly? Do you know of any law and/or court case backing this assertion? Romain There is a DMCA in both US and UK (at least)... The EU has a directive that requires member countries to implement at least some parts of the DMCA. For example Finland opted to implement the full thing, and people have actually gotten convictions for using decss (so far only people who turned themselves in as a protest, however). The US has a lot of power and desire to push their agenda through in other countries, which tends to mean that a legal problems in the US will easily spread to a lot of places. The ACTA and TPPA things are nice examples (they include the DMCA and worse). -- Arto Jantunen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87bonvmyy0@iki.fi
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
2012/3/17 Arto Jantunen vi...@debian.org: Thomas Goirand z...@debian.org writes: On 03/17/2012 06:11 AM, Romain Beauxis wrote: 2012/3/11 Mike Hommey m...@glandium.org The problem is: decss is illegal in very much more than just the US. This is a very different situation. Orly? Do you know of any law and/or court case backing this assertion? Romain There is a DMCA in both US and UK (at least)... The EU has a directive that requires member countries to implement at least some parts of the DMCA. For example Finland opted to implement the full thing, and people have actually gotten convictions for using decss (so far only people who turned themselves in as a protest, however). The US has a lot of power and desire to push their agenda through in other countries, which tends to mean that a legal problems in the US will easily spread to a lot of places. The ACTA and TPPA things are nice examples (they include the DMCA and worse). Yes, but how does that make decss or other CSS decryption codes illegal? It's a cliche comparison but still, CSS decryption is the knife and DMCA is the murder; the fact that murder is illegal does not imply that knives are. There are grounds for declaring a CSS decryption code illegal, such as license and patent infringement but, as far as I know, there is not existing legal decision on that mater, at least in western Europe. Furthermore, concerning libdvdcss, encryption keys are generated or brute-force'd which makes it even harder to argue based on intellectual property.. Also libdvdcss has never been legally challenged. Most of the legal arguments on this matter are based on legal bullying. There may be some serious threat, though, but I believe that it is wrong to consider CSS decryption codes illegal per say. Romain -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CABWZ6OQfaersAqE-Mtrv=NF3u-yd=-RfzUKL=etc-xuv_w3...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Sun, 2012-03-11 at 10:02 +0100, Eric Valette wrote: Again, I can understand the reasons, but an average user expects to be able to read dvd or blue-ray or to get a decent multimedia player. Other distribution do have ways to provide it to their users. Which distro provides Blu-Ray playback? Even though there is libaacs and friends now... the MKBs are only publicly known till version ... what? ... 10? Chris. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Sun, 2012-03-11 at 00:56 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: Because it's not illegal in just Kbanga. The content providers are doing their best to make it illegal everywhere, and would potentially harass Debian as an organization in rather more than just one country if we distribute decss. In principle you're right,.. but we start to enter a path of doom if we censor ourself like this... You'll probably be able to find thousands of places in any distro, where some patent troll or content mafia organisations pretend to have rights on. This starts with Redmonds FAT in the Linux kernel over probably gazillions of Patents of VoIP or other multimedia techniques. Unfortunately courts in many countries largely follow those evil organisations. Cheers, Chris. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
Christoph Anton Mitterer cales...@scientia.net writes: In principle you're right,.. but we start to enter a path of doom if we censor ourself like this... You'll probably be able to find thousands of places in any distro, where some patent troll or content mafia organisations pretend to have rights on. Hence the Debian patent policy. We can't just ignore things like this, nor is it responsible use of project resources to openly flaunt disobedience to laws, however ill-conceived. But neither is it Debian policy to seek out trouble when that trouble isn't forthcoming. If you do want to be part of an organization that openly disobeys stupid laws and makes a point of civil disobedience, more power to you. I personally will be cheering you on. But the Debian Project is not that organization, nor is it structured to be that organization (and carefully structuring such an organization is important). The Debian Project has other goals, which mostly require that it work within the legal framework that it has available while making public statements when that legal framework interferes with project goals. As individual developers, we can of course support a range of organizations, from the practical and goal-oriented to those that are more political, adversarial, or aimed at practicing civil disobedience, as we feel is appropriate and as match our individual beliefs. It doesn't work for one organization to try to be all of those things at once. The situation with decss is not new, and the project has been putting up with it for quite a long time. The legal situation around DRM and other content restrictions continues to be troubling, but I don't think anything has changed about decss recently that augurs a path of doom. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/873996n08h@windlord.stanford.edu
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Saturday, March 17, 2012 21:53:18, Russ Allbery wrote: Christoph Anton Mitterer cales...@scientia.net writes: In principle you're right,.. but we start to enter a path of doom if we censor ourself like this... You'll probably be able to find thousands of places in any distro, where some patent troll or content mafia organisations pretend to have rights on. Hence the Debian patent policy. We can't just ignore things like this, nor is it responsible use of project resources to openly flaunt disobedience to laws, however ill-conceived. But neither is it Debian policy to seek out trouble when that trouble isn't forthcoming. If you do want to be part of an organization that openly disobeys stupid laws and makes a point of civil disobedience, more power to you. I personally will be cheering you on. But the Debian Project is not that organization, nor is it structured to be that organization (and carefully structuring such an organization is important). The Debian Project has other goals, which mostly require that it work within the legal framework that it has available while making public statements when that legal framework interferes with project goals. The above explains the whole reason d-m.o exists. However perhaps it also might explain the tenuous relationship d.o has with d-m.o because d.o may need to distance itself from the work d-m.o does. -- Chris -- Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201203180129.20352.chris.kna...@coredump.us
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us writes: On Saturday, March 17, 2012 21:53:18, Russ Allbery wrote: Hence the Debian patent policy. We can't just ignore things like this, nor is it responsible use of project resources to openly flaunt disobedience to laws, however ill-conceived. But neither is it Debian policy to seek out trouble when that trouble isn't forthcoming. If you do want to be part of an organization that openly disobeys stupid laws and makes a point of civil disobedience, more power to you. I personally will be cheering you on. But the Debian Project is not that organization, nor is it structured to be that organization (and carefully structuring such an organization is important). The Debian Project has other goals, which mostly require that it work within the legal framework that it has available while making public statements when that legal framework interferes with project goals. The above explains the whole reason d-m.o exists. However perhaps it also might explain the tenuous relationship d.o has with d-m.o because d.o may need to distance itself from the work d-m.o does. Yup. Exactly. Christian is taking on himself the legal risk of providing those packages, which the project as a whole can't really do. Discussion about the confusion that can be caused by some of the other packages he carries aside (and I do think that issue is real), I for one thank him for his work. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87fwd6jwtt@windlord.stanford.edu
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 12:21:14AM +, Ben Hutchings wrote: On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 04:11:00PM -0400, Patrick Ouellette wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 09:48:02AM +0100, Luk Claes wrote: Why so? If I make a copy for backup and want to use it, how would I do that without use of decss or similar? Or is making a backup copy no legitimate use anymore? You don't need decss to make a backup copy of a DVD. All you have to do is a block copy of the media. That is just one of the reasons the arguments against decss are/were less than intelligent. DVD-CCA was not that stupid. Consumer writable DVD media does not allow you to write the disc keys, so you cannot make a simple copy that is readable by an authorised DVD player. That may be the theory, but the real world implementation seems to be a little different. I have not heard of anyone having a problem using a block copy to backup a commercially produced consumer DVD to consumer writable DVD media. -- ,-. Patrick Ouellette | Above all the grace and the gifts that Christ pat(at)flying-gecko.net | gives to his beloved is that of overcoming self. Amateur Radio: NE4PO| -- Francis of Assisi `-' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120316171143.ga28...@flying-gecko.net
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 08:20:22PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote: On Thursday, March 15, 2012 16:11:00, Patrick Ouellette wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 09:48:02AM +0100, Luk Claes wrote: Why so? If I make a copy for backup and want to use it, how would I do that without use of decss or similar? Or is making a backup copy no legitimate use anymore? You don't need decss to make a backup copy of a DVD. All you have to do is a block copy of the media. That is just one of the reasons the arguments against decss are/were less than intelligent. That depends on whether the DVD will fit onto the media its to be burnt to. If the DVD needs to be resampled in order to get it to fit onto the burnt media, then you need to be able to decypher it to be able to do that. Resampling could be termed a derivative work, not a backup copy since you are throwing away information contained in the original. -- ,-. Patrick Ouellette| I have been all things unholy. If God can work pat(at)flying-gecko.net | through me, he can work through anyone. Amateur Radio: NE4PO | -- Francis of Assisi `-' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120316171330.gb28...@flying-gecko.net
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Friday, March 16, 2012 13:13:30, Patrick Ouellette wrote: On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 08:20:22PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote: On Thursday, March 15, 2012 16:11:00, Patrick Ouellette wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 09:48:02AM +0100, Luk Claes wrote: Why so? If I make a copy for backup and want to use it, how would I do that without use of decss or similar? Or is making a backup copy no legitimate use anymore? You don't need decss to make a backup copy of a DVD. All you have to do is a block copy of the media. That is just one of the reasons the arguments against decss are/were less than intelligent. That depends on whether the DVD will fit onto the media its to be burnt to. If the DVD needs to be resampled in order to get it to fit onto the burnt media, then you need to be able to decypher it to be able to do that. Resampling could be termed a derivative work, not a backup copy since you are throwing away information contained in the original. That may be, but some source media is 8 GB such that a direct copy cannot be made onto even a dual-layer DVD, so resampling is the only option if a backup (as far as the layman is concerned) is to be made. That this procedure becomes a derivative work simply illustrates one of the areas where d.o and d-m.o philosophically diverge even though both share common ground in trying to support a universal operating system. -- Chris -- Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201203161516.21573.chris.kna...@coredump.us
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On 03/17/2012 03:16 AM, Chris Knadle wrote: On Friday, March 16, 2012 13:13:30, Patrick Ouellette wrote: Resampling could be termed a derivative work, not a backup copy since you are throwing away information contained in the original. That may be, but some source media is 8 GB such that a direct copy cannot be made onto even a dual-layer DVD, so resampling is the only option if a backup (as far as the layman is concerned) is to be made. That this procedure becomes a derivative work simply illustrates one of the areas where d.o and d-m.o philosophically diverge even though both share common ground in trying to support a universal operating system. I thought that there was some writable DVD 9 available on the market. Did I dream? Also, why not writing the DVD image on your HDD? Thomas P.S: You can buy DVDs on the street for 0.5 EUR here, which is a major contribution to the film industry... :) I'd be a useless loss of time to do backups of these. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f63a2eb.8080...@debian.org
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 3:23 AM, Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us wrote: On Monday, March 05, 2012 10:42:50, Reinhard Tartler wrote: ... Friendly discussion with the maintainer of debian-multimedia.org to not replace libraries such as libavcodec and friends have failed ultimatively (BTW, that is part of the reason why we've ended up with an epoch of '4', dmo uses epoch '5'); he has repeatedly shown that is not interested in collaborating with pkg-multimedia at all. He also does not seem interested in installing libraries in a way that they do not interfere with 'official' Debian packages (e.g., by changing SONAMES, or installing in private directories, etc.). I've been trying to find where these discussions occurred, but I'm unable to find them in either [dmo-discussion] mailing list archives (which go back as far as June 2010), nor in the [debian-multimedia] mailing list at least as far back as January 2010. Try the pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/2008-November/002221.html -- regards, Reinhard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAJ0cceZZ+G56DLW4yp=QF5DgP-tww_NWKyO91b=aqCJT0wy=-g...@mail.gmail.com
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 04:30:35AM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: Also, why not writing the DVD image on your HDD? How'd you loan that to a friend? What exactly are you arguing: that someone should never need to resample a DVD? -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120316211514.GA18317@debian
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Reinhard Tartler siret...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 3:23 AM, Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us wrote: On Monday, March 05, 2012 10:42:50, Reinhard Tartler wrote: ... Friendly discussion with the maintainer of debian-multimedia.org to not replace libraries such as libavcodec and friends have failed ultimatively (BTW, that is part of the reason why we've ended up with an epoch of '4', dmo uses epoch '5'); he has repeatedly shown that is not interested in collaborating with pkg-multimedia at all. He also does not seem interested in installing libraries in a way that they do not interfere with 'official' Debian packages (e.g., by changing SONAMES, or installing in private directories, etc.). I've been trying to find where these discussions occurred, but I'm unable to find them in either [dmo-discussion] mailing list archives (which go back as far as June 2010), nor in the [debian-multimedia] mailing list at least as far back as January 2010. Try the pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/2008-November/002221.html -- regards, Reinhard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caj0ccezz+g56dlw4ypqf5dgp-tww_nwkyo91baqcjt0w...@mail.gmail.com Here's another one, showing more or less what Reinhard has been saying. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=592457 -- ~ Andres -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/capm41np68-aaiooqf1q0mpt1tlkbrmgp1bamuye8crmwmgh...@mail.gmail.com
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
2012/3/11 Mike Hommey m...@glandium.org On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 09:16:47AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 03:53:18AM +, brian m. carlson wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 01:39:13AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 11:00:30AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: Your complaint, then, is against those who use the law to restrict your use of your legally-acquired DVD or Blu-Ray disc and disingenuously call it “protection”. It is misdirected against the Debian project. In other words, until non-US comes back, d-m.o can't go away. I think this demonstrates a lack of understanding about non-US. non-US was for things that could be legally used everywhere, but could not be *exported* from the US without serious hassle. non-US was *not* for things which could not legally be used in the US. Old non-US did, yeah. The new need for geographically limited distribution has different rules. And I would like to point out, for the record, that it is not only the US that has stupid laws. Yes, we certainly have more than our share, but, for example, Germany has stupid laws that prevent certain video games from being played, Yet I don't see [Free]Doom excluded from Debian while decss is. That's the big difference here. and Australia also has stupid video game laws that could be interpreted as being binding against Debian. And Debian carries, say, Nethack, which has a sex scene (several lines of text, but still...). I'm sure that every country has laws which are problematic; don't blame it all on the US. When the totem law of Kbanga declares that displaying any words with two consonant clusters is illegal on Fridays, the rest of the world doesn't suffer. Being able to pop in a DVD and play it is something an average person takes for granted. If oppressive laws in a single country stop a good part of multimedia functionality, why should that functionality be taken away from everyone else? The problem is: decss is illegal in very much more than just the US. This is a very different situation. Orly? Do you know of any law and/or court case backing this assertion? Romain -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/cabwz6oshbjeuhedgk8rlm7eatw71f-7a+wwuuzo+iuhl8tq...@mail.gmail.com
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Friday, March 16, 2012 16:30:35, Thomas Goirand wrote: On 03/17/2012 03:16 AM, Chris Knadle wrote: On Friday, March 16, 2012 13:13:30, Patrick Ouellette wrote: Resampling could be termed a derivative work, not a backup copy since you are throwing away information contained in the original. That may be, but some source media is 8 GB such that a direct copy cannot be made onto even a dual-layer DVD, so resampling is the only option if a backup (as far as the layman is concerned) is to be made. That this procedure becomes a derivative work simply illustrates one of the areas where d.o and d-m.o philosophically diverge even though both share common ground in trying to support a universal operating system. I thought that there was some writable DVD 9 available on the market. Did I dream? Not positive, but that might just be marketing. 8 GiB = 8.6 GB Also, why not writing the DVD image on your HDD? Yes, although that defeats the purpose of making a backup to DVD media. P.S: You can buy DVDs on the street for 0.5 EUR here, which is a major contribution to the film industry... :) I'd be a useless loss of time to do backups of these. I find it nice to be able to make and use a backup copy of DVDs I own and care about (and which aren't cheap), use only the copy, then when the copy wears out, make another copy from the original. This allows things like handing the DVD to a child, knowing that the child will very likely scratch it up, and not needing to worry. -- Chris -- Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201203161818.30620.chris.kna...@coredump.us
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Reinhard Tartler siret...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 3:23 AM, Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us wrote: On Monday, March 05, 2012 10:42:50, Reinhard Tartler wrote: ... Friendly discussion with the maintainer of debian-multimedia.org to not replace libraries such as libavcodec and friends have failed ultimatively (BTW, that is part of the reason why we've ended up with an epoch of '4', dmo uses epoch '5'); he has repeatedly shown that is not interested in collaborating with pkg-multimedia at all. He also does not seem interested in installing libraries in a way that they do not interfere with 'official' Debian packages (e.g., by changing SONAMES, or installing in private directories, etc.). I've been trying to find where these discussions occurred, but I'm unable to find them in either [dmo-discussion] mailing list archives (which go back as far as June 2010), nor in the [debian-multimedia] mailing list at least as far back as January 2010. Try the pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list: Thanks. http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/2008- November/002221.html On this all I see is a request on the mailing list meant for Christian re:epoch, but no reply. It's also 4 years ago, before the release of Lenny. -- regards, Reinhard Other emails I see on [pkg-multimedia-maintainers] going back to 2010: Christian Marrilat: Mar 19 2011 (helpful): Bug#618899: libffms2-dev: Missing dependecies [1] Aug 14 2011 (quite interesting): Bug#637758: libmp4v2-dev: Should be architecture any and not all [2] Nov 19 2010 (snide): Bug#544062: ITP: xcfa -- X Convert File Audio [3] Christian might be opinionated, but it also seems to me like he's trying to work (at least some) with d.o AFAICS. Another recent thread relating to d-m.o: Andres Mejia, Mar 5 2012: Fwd: Re: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains [4] Reinhard Tartler Mar 5 2012 (interesting): Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains [5] Logic question: why is debian-multimedia.org considered a Debian domain when it's not under a *.debian.org DNS name, but yet something *.debian.net is not considered part of Debian? Is anything *[debian]*.org of issue? On Friday, March 16, 2012 17:34:12, Andres Mejia wrote: ... Here's another one, showing more or less what Reinhard has been saying. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=592457 Yes I've read the above bug report previously -- it's simultaneously mildly shocking but also not very illuminating. Christian gets frustrated when his bug report is lowered in severity after 4 weeks with no explanation, S.Z. makes an insinuation of a problem between Christian and ffmpeg maintainers. There are several ways to read between the lines there. Thankfully even though the social outcome is somewhat negative, the bug has a positive technical outcome. [1] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia- maintainers/2011-March/017082.html [2] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia- maintainers/2011-August/021110.html [3] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia- maintainers/2010-November/014112.html [4] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia- maintainers/2012-March/025117.html [5] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia- maintainers/2012-March/025125.html -- Chris -- Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201203162040.08869.chris.kna...@coredump.us
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On 03/17/2012 05:15 AM, Jon Dowland wrote: On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 04:30:35AM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: Also, why not writing the DVD image on your HDD? How'd you loan that to a friend? Are you sure you can lend *a copy* to a friend? What exactly are you arguing: that someone should never need to resample a DVD? I'm arguing that you may *want* to do it, it might be *convenient*, but you don't have the rights to do it in many countries. I'd be great to hear a French lawyer about down-sampling (in France, the law allows you to make backups of things you own, like software or music). But what's for sure is that in USA or UK, you'd be breaking the DMCA. Now, I agree that the situation is crap, but in this case, you should complain to the law makers and to the film industry, not to Debian, which is also a collateral victim here. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f642092.3080...@debian.org
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On 03/17/2012 06:11 AM, Romain Beauxis wrote: 2012/3/11 Mike Hommey m...@glandium.org The problem is: decss is illegal in very much more than just the US. This is a very different situation. Orly? Do you know of any law and/or court case backing this assertion? Romain There is a DMCA in both US and UK (at least)... Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f6420f7.8020...@debian.org
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 09:48:02AM +0100, Luk Claes wrote: Why so? If I make a copy for backup and want to use it, how would I do that without use of decss or similar? Or is making a backup copy no legitimate use anymore? You don't need decss to make a backup copy of a DVD. All you have to do is a block copy of the media. That is just one of the reasons the arguments against decss are/were less than intelligent. Pat -- ,-. Patrick Ouellette| No one is to be called an enemy, all are your pat(at)flying-gecko.net | benefactors, and no one does you harm. Amateur Radio: NE4PO | You have no enemy except yourselves. | -- Francis of Assisi `-' -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120315201100.ga24...@flying-gecko.net
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 04:11:00PM -0400, Patrick Ouellette wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 09:48:02AM +0100, Luk Claes wrote: Why so? If I make a copy for backup and want to use it, how would I do that without use of decss or similar? Or is making a backup copy no legitimate use anymore? You don't need decss to make a backup copy of a DVD. All you have to do is a block copy of the media. That is just one of the reasons the arguments against decss are/were less than intelligent. DVD-CCA was not that stupid. Consumer writable DVD media does not allow you to write the disc keys, so you cannot make a simple copy that is readable by an authorised DVD player. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking. - Albert Camus -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120316002114.gf12...@decadent.org.uk
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Thursday, March 15, 2012 16:11:00, Patrick Ouellette wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 09:48:02AM +0100, Luk Claes wrote: Why so? If I make a copy for backup and want to use it, how would I do that without use of decss or similar? Or is making a backup copy no legitimate use anymore? You don't need decss to make a backup copy of a DVD. All you have to do is a block copy of the media. That is just one of the reasons the arguments against decss are/were less than intelligent. That depends on whether the DVD will fit onto the media its to be burnt to. If the DVD needs to be resampled in order to get it to fit onto the burnt media, then you need to be able to decypher it to be able to do that. It's sad to hear that d-m.o has caused some upgrade trouble. I've yet to encounter this myself (that I know of). It would be nice to have some clear instructions on how to set up a Pin to lower the priority in apt for d-m.o packages. Will the following do the trick? Package: * Pin: origin www.debian-multimedia.org Pin-Priority: 100 -- Chris -- Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201203152020.22424.chris.kna...@coredump.us
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
Hi, Le 15/03/2012 20:20, Chris Knadle a écrit : It would be nice to have some clear instructions on how to set up a Pin to lower the priority in apt for d-m.o packages. Will the following do the trick? Package: * Pin: origin www.debian-multimedia.org Pin-Priority: 100 Please, prefer advise the following: Package: * Pin: release l=Unofficial Multimedia Packages Pin-Priority: 100 That will also work for any mirror and other specific configurations using apt-cacher, apt-cacher-ng, etc. Regards David signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On Monday, March 05, 2012 10:42:50, Reinhard Tartler wrote: ... Friendly discussion with the maintainer of debian-multimedia.org to not replace libraries such as libavcodec and friends have failed ultimatively (BTW, that is part of the reason why we've ended up with an epoch of '4', dmo uses epoch '5'); he has repeatedly shown that is not interested in collaborating with pkg-multimedia at all. He also does not seem interested in installing libraries in a way that they do not interfere with 'official' Debian packages (e.g., by changing SONAMES, or installing in private directories, etc.). I've been trying to find where these discussions occurred, but I'm unable to find them in either [dmo-discussion] mailing list archives (which go back as far as June 2010), nor in the [debian-multimedia] mailing list at least as far back as January 2010. The latter archives go as far back as May 2003, but I stopped looking at Jan 2010 because had hoped to see at least some public discussion somewhere back when Squeeze was being prepared for release. The only emails I've been able to find seem curteous and professional on both sides: Christian Marrilat apparently uses a Pin: release o=Unofficial Multimedia Packages (rather than l=Unofficial ...) explaining to someone how to try to avoid conflicts with the Debian Experimental repo [1] Christian Marrilat sending a patch for libv4l-dev to debian-multimedia [2] NMU from Stefano Zacchiroli which seems to included the above patch [3] While debian-multimedia.org has gained a reputation of providing packages, which were desperately lacking in Debian, IMO this repository has turned into a major source of trouble and pissed users provoking flamewars in the recent past. If so I haven't seen that on [dmo-discussion] or [debian-multimedia] either. If these happened on [debian-devel] then I can understand how I missed them as the traffic here is relatively high. [1] http://www.debian- multimedia.org/lurker/message/20100810.221410.d56b9d14.en.html [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-multimedia/2010/02/msg00013.html [3] http://lists.debian.org/debian-multimedia/2010/03/msg00015.html -- Chris -- Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201203152223.13631.chris.kna...@coredump.us
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 03:53:18AM +, brian m. carlson wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 01:39:13AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 11:00:30AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: Your complaint, then, is against those who use the law to restrict your use of your legally-acquired DVD or Blu-Ray disc and disingenuously call it “protection”. It is misdirected against the Debian project. In other words, until non-US comes back, d-m.o can't go away. I think this demonstrates a lack of understanding about non-US. non-US was for things that could be legally used everywhere, but could not be *exported* from the US without serious hassle. non-US was *not* for things which could not legally be used in the US. Old non-US did, yeah. The new need for geographically limited distribution has different rules. And I would like to point out, for the record, that it is not only the US that has stupid laws. Yes, we certainly have more than our share, but, for example, Germany has stupid laws that prevent certain video games from being played, Yet I don't see [Free]Doom excluded from Debian while decss is. That's the big difference here. and Australia also has stupid video game laws that could be interpreted as being binding against Debian. And Debian carries, say, Nethack, which has a sex scene (several lines of text, but still...). I'm sure that every country has laws which are problematic; don't blame it all on the US. When the totem law of Kbanga declares that displaying any words with two consonant clusters is illegal on Fridays, the rest of the world doesn't suffer. Being able to pop in a DVD and play it is something an average person takes for granted. If oppressive laws in a single country stop a good part of multimedia functionality, why should that functionality be taken away from everyone else? Meow! -- // If you believe in so-called intellectual property, please immediately // cease using counterfeit alphabets. Instead, contact the nearest temple // of Amon, whose priests will provide you with scribal services for all // your writing needs, for Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory prices. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 09:16:47AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 03:53:18AM +, brian m. carlson wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 01:39:13AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 11:00:30AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: Your complaint, then, is against those who use the law to restrict your use of your legally-acquired DVD or Blu-Ray disc and disingenuously call it “protection”. It is misdirected against the Debian project. In other words, until non-US comes back, d-m.o can't go away. I think this demonstrates a lack of understanding about non-US. non-US was for things that could be legally used everywhere, but could not be *exported* from the US without serious hassle. non-US was *not* for things which could not legally be used in the US. Old non-US did, yeah. The new need for geographically limited distribution has different rules. And I would like to point out, for the record, that it is not only the US that has stupid laws. Yes, we certainly have more than our share, but, for example, Germany has stupid laws that prevent certain video games from being played, Yet I don't see [Free]Doom excluded from Debian while decss is. That's the big difference here. and Australia also has stupid video game laws that could be interpreted as being binding against Debian. And Debian carries, say, Nethack, which has a sex scene (several lines of text, but still...). I'm sure that every country has laws which are problematic; don't blame it all on the US. When the totem law of Kbanga declares that displaying any words with two consonant clusters is illegal on Fridays, the rest of the world doesn't suffer. Being able to pop in a DVD and play it is something an average person takes for granted. If oppressive laws in a single country stop a good part of multimedia functionality, why should that functionality be taken away from everyone else? The problem is: decss is illegal in very much more than just the US. This is a very different situation. Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120311083753.ga5...@glandium.org
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On 03/11/2012 09:37 AM, Mike Hommey wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 09:16:47AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 03:53:18AM +, brian m. carlson wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 01:39:13AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 11:00:30AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: Your complaint, then, is against those who use the law to restrict your use of your legally-acquired DVD or Blu-Ray disc and disingenuously call it “protection”. It is misdirected against the Debian project. In other words, until non-US comes back, d-m.o can't go away. I think this demonstrates a lack of understanding about non-US. non-US was for things that could be legally used everywhere, but could not be *exported* from the US without serious hassle. non-US was *not* for things which could not legally be used in the US. Old non-US did, yeah. The new need for geographically limited distribution has different rules. And I would like to point out, for the record, that it is not only the US that has stupid laws. Yes, we certainly have more than our share, but, for example, Germany has stupid laws that prevent certain video games from being played, Yet I don't see [Free]Doom excluded from Debian while decss is. That's the big difference here. and Australia also has stupid video game laws that could be interpreted as being binding against Debian. And Debian carries, say, Nethack, which has a sex scene (several lines of text, but still...). I'm sure that every country has laws which are problematic; don't blame it all on the US. When the totem law of Kbanga declares that displaying any words with two consonant clusters is illegal on Fridays, the rest of the world doesn't suffer. Being able to pop in a DVD and play it is something an average person takes for granted. If oppressive laws in a single country stop a good part of multimedia functionality, why should that functionality be taken away from everyone else? The problem is: decss is illegal in very much more than just the US. This is a very different situation. Why so? If I make a copy for backup and want to use it, how would I do that without use of decss or similar? Or is making a backup copy no legitimate use anymore? I think it's very stupid to make it illegal to distribute software just because it *can* be used illegaly. One always punishes the legitimate users in such cases and introduces an alternative (sometimes illegal) distribution channel of the software. Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f5c66c2.8010...@debian.org
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
Luk Claes l...@debian.org writes: On 03/11/2012 09:37 AM, Mike Hommey wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 09:16:47AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: When the totem law of Kbanga declares that displaying any words with two consonant clusters is illegal on Fridays, the rest of the world doesn't suffer. Being able to pop in a DVD and play it is something an average person takes for granted. If oppressive laws in a single country stop a good part of multimedia functionality, why should that functionality be taken away from everyone else? The problem is: decss is illegal in very much more than just the US. This is a very different situation. Why so? Because it's not illegal in just Kbanga. The content providers are doing their best to make it illegal everywhere, and would potentially harass Debian as an organization in rather more than just one country if we distribute decss. It therefore doesn't constitute the case of oppressive laws in a single country in the above paragraph. (This is apart from the other problem that the US is, for better or ill and frequently both, not just a single country from the perspective of Debian governance, both because of the US's position in terms of project membership and server placement and because it's the home country of Software in the Public Interest. Debian would similarly be strongly affected by laws in Germany or the UK or another country where we have a lot of developers and infrastructure, and rather less by laws in countries were we have far less infrastructure, money, legal existence, or developers.) If I make a copy for backup and want to use it, how would I do that without use of decss or similar? Or is making a backup copy no legitimate use anymore? I think it's very stupid to make it illegal to distribute software just because it *can* be used illegaly. One always punishes the legitimate users in such cases and introduces an alternative (sometimes illegal) distribution channel of the software. I doubt many people on debian-devel would disagree with any of this, but the reality is that the content providers are convincing governments to do something really stupid. And while we can all feel that this is, indeed, really stupid, that doesn't change the legal realities of the situation for the project. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87sjhffrd9@windlord.stanford.edu
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On 03/11/2012 04:16 PM, Adam Borowski wrote: When the totem law of Kbanga declares that displaying any words with two consonant clusters is illegal on Fridays, the rest of the world doesn't suffer. Being able to pop in a DVD and play it is something an average person takes for granted. If oppressive laws in a single country stop a good part of multimedia functionality, why should that functionality be taken away from everyone else? I wholeheartedly agree with the above. However, the issue here is mainly that DVD are encrypted in the first place (IMO, they shouldn't be), and that apart from Dr. Stallman who decided to not use them, nobody cares about that fact. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f5c675d.9060...@goirand.fr
Re: Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
When the totem law of Kbanga declares that displaying any words with two consonant clusters is illegal on Fridays, the rest of the world doesn't suffer. Being able to pop in a DVD and play it is something an average person takes for granted. If oppressive laws in a single country stop a good part of multimedia functionality, why should that functionality be taken away from everyone else? The problem is: decss is illegal in very much more than just the US. This is a very different situation. Again, I can understand the reasons, but an average user expects to be able to read dvd or blue-ray or to get a decent multimedia player. Other distribution do have ways to provide it to their users. Actually official debian does not offers this and is furthermore criticizing good willing people that try to make Debian useable a multimedia/HTPC system. Some of the messages asking to help instead of complaining are in my view a bit reverted has debian-multimedia has been providing good package for ages and some debian people did prefer to reinvent the wheel. You can tomorrow take the packaging done and integrate the non law encumbered packages into normal debian repository or enhance them if it does not strictly adhere to Debian standard. --eric -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f5c6a17.4060...@free.fr
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Sonntag, 11. März 2012, Eric Valette wrote: Actually official debian does not offers this and is furthermore criticizing good willing people that try to make Debian useable a multimedia/HTPC system. official Debian is not criticising anyone here. This is just debian- devel@l.d.o: some people ranting, some discussing and some totally off anything and everything. Oh, and occisionally some good stuff too :) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120339.41172.hol...@layer-acht.org
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
OoO Pendant le temps de midi du samedi 10 mars 2012, vers 12:30, Eric Valette eric.vale...@free.fr disait : Yes acknowledged that vlc and mplayer are now up-to-date. vlc 0.5.3 was released on April, 8 2003. Debian package on April, 14 2003. vlc 0.8.6a was released on January, 4 2007. Debian package on January, 11 2007. vlc 1.0.0 was released on July, 7 2009. Debian package on July, 9 2009. vlc 1.1.0 was released on June, 22 2010. Debian package on June, 24 2010. vlc 1.1.11 was released on July, 16 2011. Debian package on July, 18 2011. vlc 2.0.0 was released on February, 18 2012. Debian package on the same day. When exactly was vlc not up-to-date on Debian? -- Vincent Bernat ☯ http://vincent.bernat.im Don't use conditional branches as a substitute for a logical expression. - The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan Plauger) pgpUA2IztkxOH.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
When exactly was vlc not up-to-date on Debian? As long as it is unable to play dvd or various codec that are non supported given the option for compiling libav for example -- eric -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f5c86f7.6010...@free.fr
Re: Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
Actually official debian does not offers this and is furthermore criticizing good willing people that try to make Debian useable in a multimedia/HTPC system. official Debian is not criticising anyone here. This is just debian- devel@l.d.o: some people ranting, some discussing and some totally off anything and everything. Oh, and occisionally some good stuff too :) Original part of the post that I found not acceptable is at http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/03/msg00151.html Author does not seem to care about people not being able to play dvd or various multimedia format or have good multimedia player because of the strict gpl compliance or stupid law. Ubuntu at least provide an official package that get libdvdcss from medibuntu... You must consider your user. You must consider your legal obligation too. Today debian-multimedia is a path that enable to run debian and to still have the necessary tools to make it acceptable for average people for their multimedia tasks. Author seems also to not remember debian-multimedia was there long before official blessed debian multimedia team even started and decided to go their own way. Will try to shut up now. -- eric -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f5c8c45.5060...@free.fr
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 11:44:50AM +0100, Eric Valette wrote: On 10/03/2012 11:14, Thomas Goirand wrote: Debian Squeeze has a very nice set of packages that will make a good fit for this platform. What do you think will be lacking exactly? XBMC, up to date ffmpeg at least with some non-free extensions for sure. Actually, ffmpeg changed names to libav recently. The latter is in Debian (unstable), not yet in debian-multimedia.org's unstable repository. Also, I fail to see why you need to be so agressive. Please calm down a bit. For the longest time, Debian didn't provide certain patent-encumbered packages because we thought we couldn't, for legal reasons. Recently, however, this policy has been changed after we received some legal advice from lawyers specializing in the area, and as a result the pkg-multimedia folks are now uploading packages without removal of features. If all goes well, eventually debian-multimedia will be obsolete because everything is in Debian proper; and that would always be better than having an extra repository, don't you think? [...] -- The volume of a pizza of thickness a and radius z can be described by the following formula: pi zz a -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120311145428.gh22...@grep.be
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
[CC Eric - drop all other CCs] On 12-03-11 at 03:54pm, Wouter Verhelst wrote: On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 11:44:50AM +0100, Eric Valette wrote: On 10/03/2012 11:14, Thomas Goirand wrote: Debian Squeeze has a very nice set of packages that will make a good fit for this platform. What do you think will be lacking exactly? XBMC, up to date ffmpeg at least with some non-free extensions for sure. Actually, ffmpeg changed names to libav recently. The latter is in Debian (unstable), not yet in debian-multimedia.org's unstable repository. Not exactly: Libav is a _fork_ of FFmpeg. /me now expecting a looong subthread on how Debian is stupid and wrong in maintaining LibAV instead of FFmpeg... - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
Eric Valette eric.vale...@free.fr writes: Again, I can understand the reasons, but an average user expects to be able to read dvd or blue-ray or to get a decent multimedia player. People are right to expect free use of the things they acquire legally. That doesn't change the fact that the copyright and patent laws, which are outside the control of the Debian project, restrict that freedom. Other distribution do have ways to provide it to their users. What concrete action of those other distributions do you suggest the Debian project should do? Do those actions, that you think Debian should emulate, involve violating the law, or violating Debian's social contract, or increasing the burden on our security team? If any of those, that may tell you why it's not already being done. You can tomorrow take the packaging done and integrate the non law encumbered packages into normal debian repository or enhance them if it does not strictly adhere to Debian standard. My understanding of reading this thread so far is that those packages that meet Debian's standards *are* being integrated into Debian. -- \ “Jury: A group of 12 people, who, having lied to the judge | `\ about their health, hearing, and business engagements, have | _o__) failed to fool him.” —Henry L. Mencken | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/878vj6kcaf@benfinney.id.au
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
While debian-multimedia.org has gained a reputation of providing packages, which were desperately lacking in Debian, IMO this repository has turned into a major source of trouble and pissed users provoking flamewars in the recent past. There is still a number of remaining multimedia-related packages that we still lack in Debian, and pkg-multimedia is working on getting at least the most popular ones packaged and uploaded - help, as always, is of course very appreciated. [2] The problem is that debian per se 1) is unusable for any serious multimedia usage. what are the version of VLC, ffmpeg, xbmc provided by debian? 2) has long pretended they have the knowledge to make multimedia packages better than other Instead of arguing you should be pleased someone makes debian useable for multimedia activities otherwise people will move to ubuntu where also multimedia packages are maintained via non official PPA Have you heard of raspberrypi, cubox, spark, that are making the buzz. What is demoed on it: multimedia capabilities. Will debian be attractiive without multimedia packages: no. In summary, I can only advise everyone against enabling that repository on any machine. Crap: I've been using that for ages (running debian since 96) with experimental+unstable and it is rock solid. Maintainer also fixes issues and respond to bug report more correctly than some other official package maintainer. --eric -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f5b19ba.8010...@free.fr
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On 03/10/2012 05:07 PM, Eric Valette wrote: The problem is that debian per se 1) is unusable for any serious multimedia usage. 1/ I don't agree. 2/ Please define serious. what are the version of VLC, ffmpeg, xbmc provided by debian? In where? Stable? SID? Backports? FYI, you can check all of this easily by yourself using packages.debian.org. Or are you trying to make the point that Debian has outdated packages? 2) has long pretended they have the knowledge to make multimedia packages better than other There's nobody pretending. Only facts that d-m.o does break things in plain Debian. That's facts, together with with the explanations and things we've found. If there are issues that you have found in the Debian packages, the Debian bug tracker is open to anyone to send bugs, and Debian is also widely open to contributions. Have you ever contributed anything to Debian? Instead of arguing you should be pleased someone makes debian useable for multimedia activities otherwise people will move to ubuntu where also multimedia packages are maintained via non official PPA I don't think anyone is trying to argue with anyone. And you, instead of complaining about behaviors of Debian maintainers, like you just do above, you should push others to participate in Debian itself, rather than working on their own stuff. Or even better: consider helping yourself. I don't think that the debian multimedia maintainers ever refused help. Have you heard of raspberrypi, cubox, spark, that are making the buzz. What is demoed on it: multimedia capabilities. Will debian be attractiive without multimedia packages: no. It's up to *anyone* (eg: including yourself) to make this change. And by the way, I have read many people writing that Debian would be a very good choice for raspberry pi. I do think that Debian Squeeze has a very nice set of packages that will make a good fit for this platform. What do you think will be lacking exactly? In summary, I can only advise everyone against enabling that repository on any machine. Crap: I've been using that for ages (running debian since 96) with experimental+unstable and it is rock solid. Sorry, after having the pain of d-m.o breaking my Lenny to Squeeze upgrade, and seeing that d-m.o introduces some epoc in the package version (at least recently for VLC) which breaks plain Debian, you absolutely *cannot* say that it's rock solid. That's just not the case at all. Also, someone else made the point that Christian Marilla doesn't want to work directly in Debian, which I believe is the main issue here. Maintainer also fixes issues and respond to bug report more correctly than some other official package maintainer. Please give facts and proves the sentence above. As much as I can tell by this thread, it has been demonstrated that packages in d-m.o do not have serious security upgrades. Also, please explain here how the official packages aren't giving security upgrades in a correct way. Debian has a security tracker, a security repository, and a security team which takes care of all these, and is in tight relationship with other distros. Can you say the same for d-m.o? It's very easy to point fingers at others, without giving proof of what you are writing, and without proposing any help. I find this a very bad attitude. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f5b2982.1040...@debian.org
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On 10/03/2012 11:14, Thomas Goirand wrote: In where? Stable? SID? Backports? FYI, you can check all of this easily by yourself using packages.debian.org. Or are you trying to make the point that Debian has outdated packages? I ask you a question: what are the version of the packeges in debian unstable and in debian-multimedia.org trying to be factual. I know the answer, I just would like someone from debian to write it down ;-) I know the version already yes. And yes debian is completely outdated. Or even better: consider helping yourself. I don't think that the debian multimedia maintainers ever refused help. I do help the people providing the packages I need and currently its debian-multimedia. Have you heard of raspberrypi, cubox, spark, that are making the buzz. What is demoed on it: multimedia capabilities. Will debian be attractiive without multimedia packages: no. It's up to *anyone* (eg: including yourself) to make this change. And by the way, I have read many people writing that Debian would be a very good choice for raspberry pi. I do think that Debian Squeeze has a very nice set of packages that will make a good fit for this platform. What do you think will be lacking exactly? XBMC, up to date ffmpeg at least with some non-free extensions for sure. It's very easy to point fingers at others, without giving proof of what you are writing, and without proposing any help. I find this a very bad attitude. I was not the first pointing fingers. And yes it's because I also think it is bad attitude that I reacted. -- eric -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f5b30a2.7040...@free.fr
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On Sat, 2012-03-10 at 11:44 +0100, Eric Valette wrote: I ask you a question: what are the version of the packeges in debian unstable and in debian-multimedia.org trying to be factual. I know the answer, I just would like someone from debian to write it down ;-) I know the version already yes. And yes debian is completely outdated. vlc |2.0.0-6 | unstable | source http://www.debian-multimedia.org/dists/unstable/main/binary-amd64/package/vlc.php says they're shipping 1:2.0.0-0.1. What was your point? As I'm sure you're aware, Debian ships libav rather than ffmpeg. The latest libav release is 0.8, and: libav |4:0.8-2 | unstable | source Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1331377898.24969.12.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On 10/03/2012 11:44, Eric Valette wrote: I know the version already yes. And yes debian is completely outdated. To be fair, but catching up at least for vlc, mplayer... Still no xbmc, handbrake, libdvbcsa tough and quite old ffmpeg -- eric -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f5b3515.10...@free.fr
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On 10/03/2012 12:03, Eric Valette wrote: On 10/03/2012 11:44, Eric Valette wrote: I know the version already yes. And yes debian is completely outdated. To be fair, but catching up at least for vlc, mplayer... Still no xbmc, handbrake, libdvbcsa tough and quite old ffmpeg mythtv, tvheadend, ... -- eric -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f5b3659.5010...@free.fr
Re: Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
Yes acknowledged that vlc and mplayer are now up-to-date. Libav vs ffmpeg could be per se part of the debate. We could also speak about compilation options and induced feature/codec support what about xbmc, mythv, tvheadend, avidemux? -- eric -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f5b3b53.5050...@free.fr
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 11:44:50 +0100, Eric Valette eric.vale...@free.fr wrote: On 10/03/2012 11:14, Thomas Goirand wrote: In where? Stable? SID? Backports? FYI, you can check all of this easily by yourself using packages.debian.org. Or are you trying to make the point that Debian has outdated packages? I ask you a question: what are the version of the packeges in debian unstable and in debian-multimedia.org trying to be factual. I know the answer, I just would like someone from debian to write it down ;-) I know the version already yes. And yes debian is completely outdated. Really? http://www.debian-multimedia.org/dists/unstable/main/binary-amd64/package/vlc.php Details for vlc (1:2.0.0-0.1) http://packages.debian.org/wheezy/vlc Package: vlc (2.0.0-6) so, yes there's the spurious epoch there, but otherwise that looks like the same latest version. Even if you were talking about stable -- well d-m.o doesn't have a version of vlc in its stable repository, but perhaps you're on about stable-backports: http://www.debian-multimedia.org/dists/squeeze-backports/main/binary-amd64/package/vlc.php Details for vlc (1.1.3-1squeeze6.1) which I must say I was surprised to see is not at the latest version, and is not even more up to date than the stable debian version. http://packages.debian.org/squeeze/vlc Package: vlc (1.1.3-1squeeze6) I presume that's why you didn't risk backing up your point with any facts or references. Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560]http://www.hands.com/ |-| HANDS.COM Ltd.http://www.uk.debian.org/ |(| 10 Onslow Gardens, South Woodford, London E18 1NE ENGLAND pgpwM4uDx3M0T.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On 10/03/2012 12:40, Philip Hands wrote: Really? Again, vlc or mplayer do not make a multi-media capable distribution. take a look at yavdr, openelec, geexbox, ubuntu studio and the packages they provide Read http://thelinuxcauldron.wordpress.com/2009/04/14/the-list-the-top-5-media-center-programs-for-linux/ and see the one you have. -- eric -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f5b4a59.7050...@free.fr
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On 12-03-10 at 12:30pm, Eric Valette wrote: Yes acknowledged that vlc and mplayer are now up-to-date. Libav vs ffmpeg could be per se part of the debate. We could also speak about compilation options and induced feature/codec support what about xbmc, mythv, tvheadend, avidemux? Well, you started this subthread, so you get to explain what is the point of emphasizing those: I am quite puzzled how you mean to say that only with up-to-date versions of _those_ tools can you do _serious_ multimedia. That was your claim, right? - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On 12-03-10 at 01:34pm, Eric Valette wrote: On 10/03/2012 12:40, Philip Hands wrote: Really? Again, vlc or mplayer do not make a multi-media capable distribution. take a look at yavdr, openelec, geexbox, ubuntu studio and the packages they provide Read http://thelinuxcauldron.wordpress.com/2009/04/14/the-list-the-top-5-media-center-programs-for-linux/ and see the one you have. Ahh, so your definition of serious multimedia is media centers. Thanks for clarifying. I agree, that's an area Debian has too few poeple devoted to currently. Please do consider to help out yourself! NB! Contrary to common misunderstanding, you need not be a full member of Debian to work closely with us. More info here: http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia#Get_involved Regards, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
take a look at yavdr, openelec, geexbox, ubuntu studio and the packages they provide Readhttp://thelinuxcauldron.wordpress.com/2009/04/14/the-list-the-top-5-media-center-programs-for-linux/ and see the one you have. Ahh, so your definition of serious multimedia is media centers. Thanks for clarifying. I agree, that's an area Debian has too few poeple devoted to currently. Please do consider to help out yourself! Thanks for not copying me. Afraid I was going to answer? Ubuntu studio is not media center BTW. And you also need sources to browse and its mainly IPTV or DVB-T/C/S, DVD or blue-ray. With actual policy (that I respect and understand), you are not going to provide stuff to circumvent protection means meaning I cannot watch even a dvd. I help debugging XBMC and ffmpeg using debian packaging tool. Feel free to incorporate other people work. --eric -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f5b75cf.1080...@free.fr
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On 12-03-10 at 04:39pm, Eric Valette wrote: take a look at yavdr, openelec, geexbox, ubuntu studio and the packages they provide Readhttp://thelinuxcauldron.wordpress.com/2009/04/14/the-list-the-top-5-media-center-programs-for-linux/ and see the one you have. Ahh, so your definition of serious multimedia is media centers. Thanks for clarifying. I agree, that's an area Debian has too few poeple devoted to currently. Please do consider to help out yourself! Thanks for not copying me. Afraid I was going to answer? No. This list assumes subscription and welcomes explicit requests to cc: http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct Ubuntu studio is not media center BTW. Good point. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
Eric Valette eric.vale...@free.fr writes: Thanks for not copying me. Afraid I was going to answer? This mailing list, like all sensibly-run mailing lists, does not munge the ‘Reply-To’ field. If you have a conversation in a public forum, the onus is on you to participate in the discussion in that public forum. With actual policy (that I respect and understand), you are not going to provide stuff to circumvent protection means meaning I cannot watch even a dvd. Your complaint, then, is against those who use the law to restrict your use of your legally-acquired DVD or Blu-Ray disc and disingenuously call it “protection”. It is misdirected against the Debian project. I help debugging XBMC and ffmpeg using debian packaging tool. Feel free to incorporate other people work. A precondition is that the terms make it legally free to do that. Thank you for your work to improve Debian for everyone. -- \ “Cross country skiing is great if you live in a small country.” | `\—Steven Wright | _o__) | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87d38kj9b5@benfinney.id.au
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 11:00:30AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: Eric Valette eric.vale...@free.fr writes: With actual policy (that I respect and understand), you are not going to provide stuff to circumvent protection means meaning I cannot watch even a dvd. Your complaint, then, is against those who use the law to restrict your use of your legally-acquired DVD or Blu-Ray disc and disingenuously call it “protection”. It is misdirected against the Debian project. In other words, until non-US comes back, d-m.o can't go away. -- // If you believe in so-called intellectual property, please immediately // cease using counterfeit alphabets. Instead, contact the nearest temple // of Amon, whose priests will provide you with scribal services for all // your writing needs, for Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory prices. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 01:39:13AM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 11:00:30AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: Your complaint, then, is against those who use the law to restrict your use of your legally-acquired DVD or Blu-Ray disc and disingenuously call it “protection”. It is misdirected against the Debian project. In other words, until non-US comes back, d-m.o can't go away. I think this demonstrates a lack of understanding about non-US. non-US was for things that could be legally used everywhere, but could not be *exported* from the US without serious hassle. non-US was *not* for things which could not legally be used in the US. And I would like to point out, for the record, that it is not only the US that has stupid laws. Yes, we certainly have more than our share, but, for example, Germany has stupid laws that prevent certain video games from being played, and Australia also has stupid video game laws that could be interpreted as being binding against Debian. I'm sure that every country has laws which are problematic; don't blame it all on the US. -- brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US +1 832 623 2791 | http://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only OpenPGP: RSA v4 4096b: 88AC E9B2 9196 305B A994 7552 F1BA 225C 0223 B187 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On 2012-03-05 16:42:50 +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote: Friendly discussion with the maintainer of debian-multimedia.org to not replace libraries such as libavcodec and friends have failed ultimatively (BTW, that is part of the reason why we've ended up with an epoch of '4', dmo uses epoch '5'); he has repeatedly shown that is not interested in collaborating with pkg-multimedia at all. He also does not seem interested in installing libraries in a way that they do not interfere with 'official' Debian packages (e.g., by changing SONAMES, or installing in private directories, etc.). It's worse than that. Security support is non-existent, and users don't know that. An example: http://lists.debian.org/debian-user-french/2010/08/msg6.html where a user recommended flashplayer-mozilla from debian-multimedia (debian-multimedia.org), saying that it was working very well. What he didn't say (and there was no information on debian-multimedia.org either), is that this was a version with critical vulnerabilities known since June 2010: http://www.adobe.com/support/security/bulletins/apsb10-14.html -- Vincent Lefèvre vinc...@vinc17.net - Web: http://www.vinc17.net/ 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: http://www.vinc17.net/blog/ Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120308114637.gd3...@xvii.vinc17.org
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On 2012-03-08, Vincent Lefevre vinc...@vinc17.net wrote: It's worse than that. Security support is non-existent, and users don't know that. An example: [… non-free package …] Well, non-free in Debian proper doesn't have security support neither. But then I guess one could argue that users at least know that this is the case, don't they? Kind regards Philipp Kern -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/slrnjlh9t9.5cg.tr...@kelgar.0x539.de
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On 2012-03-08 12:35:53 +, Philipp Kern wrote: On 2012-03-08, Vincent Lefevre vinc...@vinc17.net wrote: It's worse than that. Security support is non-existent, and users don't know that. An example: [… non-free package …] Well, non-free in Debian proper doesn't have security support neither. But then I guess one could argue that users at least know that this is the case, don't they? No, the package was *not* a non-free package, it was in main. I did the remark at that time: http://lists.debian.org/debian-user-french/2010/08/msg00082.html So, again, this is really misleading for the end user. -- Vincent Lefèvre vinc...@vinc17.net - Web: http://www.vinc17.net/ 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: http://www.vinc17.net/blog/ Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120308150958.ge3...@xvii.vinc17.org
Re: picking packages from repos was: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
Andreas Tille: On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 04:42:50PM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote: In summary, I can only advise everyone against enabling that repository on any machine. If I would have time to become a pkg-multimedia member I would try to establish installing multimedia applications via metapackages build be the Blends framework. I would most probably drop some file /etc/apt/preferences.d/01-disable-dmo.pref in multimedia-config metapackage (where all other metapackages usually depend from). This would enable those users who really know what they are doing picking singular packages via well defined preferences from d.m.o if needed and prevent users who blindly inject random sources inside their sources.list from killing their system. Hi Andreas, could you point me to the necessary documentation, please? I'd like to enable the non-free repo, but only pick a few packages from it. How can I do this? This would also be useful to pick only a few packages from unstable, e.g. those that I maintain. Regards, Thomas Koch, http://www.koch.ro -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201203060947.28896.tho...@koch.ro
Re: picking packages from repos was: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 09:47:28AM +0100, Thomas Koch wrote: could you point me to the necessary documentation, please? I'd like to enable the non-free repo, but only pick a few packages from it. How can I do this? man apt_preferences This would also be useful to pick only a few packages from unstable, e.g. those that I maintain. For instance I use $ cat /etc/apt/preferences.d/01-debian-policy.pref /etc/apt/preferences.d/01-lintian.pref Package: debian-policy Pin: release a=unstable Pin-Priority: 605 Package: lintian Pin: release a=unstable Pin-Priority: 605 While my /etc/apt/preferences has lines like this Package: * Pin: release a=testing Pin-Priority: 501 Package: * Pin: release a=unstable Pin-Priority: 50 Package: * Pin: release a=experimental Pin-Priority: 5 Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120306090549.ga26...@an3as.eu
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 10:23:33AM +0900, Norbert Preining wrote: On Di, 06 Mär 2012, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: the Blends framework. I would most probably drop some file /etc/apt/preferences.d/01-disable-dmo.pref in multimedia-config metapackage (where all other metapackages usually And I would file a serious bug against that. There is no reasoning behind that is in any way reasonable. Only because these are providing similar packages starting a hunting down the enemies race is irrational, or even worse, simply stupid. In how far is it stupid that if a metapackage intends to install a set of _Debian_ packages featuring multimedia tasks to make sure that really these packages are installed while enabling a user to install, say acrobat reader in addition without influencing the set of multimedia packages available inside Debian? It is not about hunting down anything but installing reasonable preconfiguration - local admin can override this for sure. I wonder what criterion of serios bug would apply here. Just for the sake of interest because I do not intend to implement this personally. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120306091502.gb26...@an3as.eu
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On Di, 06 Mär 2012, Andreas Tille wrote:
I wonder what criterion of serios bug would apply here. Just for the
sake of interest because I do not intend to implement this personally.
Too lazy to search for it, but overriding a configuration of a
system admin is for sure not allowed. If it would be, I can stop
caring of conffile upgrades ...
What if the next package decides do disable X, login, and whatever?
Is that policy conform?
Anyway, don't care for extending this rubbish discussion.
Norbert
Norbert Preiningpreining@{jaist.ac.jp, logic.at, debian.org}
JAIST, Japan TeX Live Debian Developer
DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
FEAKLE (vb.)
To make facial expressions similar to those that old gentlemen make to
young girls in the playground.
--- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120306104052.gb24...@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
Hey. Stupid question... but even for those packages, which Debian provides now itself (by the fine work of the pkg-multimedia-maintainers)... are they build with all the options enabled? I believe to remember that there were some cases where mp4 stuff was disabled then... I surely haven't had to work as closely with Christian as you guys did,.. but I sometimes notified him of packages which used to show up in Debian (libaacs and friends) and he dropped them from DMO. Cheers, Chris. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Thijs Kinkhorst th...@debian.org wrote: But before getting there, the question is whether the existence of the website (and its popularity) poses problem to Debian reputation and/or to the activity of official Debian multimedia packaging. I think this is a question for the Debian Multimedia Maintainers (as in pkg-multimedia-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org) to answer. If they see a problem with debian-multimedia.org, we should get in touch with the website maintainers and solve the issue. Of course, one of the reasons debian-multimedia exists is precisely because it's unofficial: it can package things that Debian out of policy doesn't want to package. This is not something that can necessarily be solved on a packaging level. A recurring problem we have in pkg-multimedia is that debian-multimedia.org provides packages that replace both applications and libraries that we already ship with Debian. Especially for libraries, this can (and in fact, this does happen regularly) lead to crashes which are very hard to diagnose. Therefore, we have a policy to just close a bug with a very short explanation if we notice that the crash involves a package from debian-multimedia.org; everything else is absolutely not worth the trouble. Cf. also [1]. Friendly discussion with the maintainer of debian-multimedia.org to not replace libraries such as libavcodec and friends have failed ultimatively (BTW, that is part of the reason why we've ended up with an epoch of '4', dmo uses epoch '5'); he has repeatedly shown that is not interested in collaborating with pkg-multimedia at all. He also does not seem interested in installing libraries in a way that they do not interfere with 'official' Debian packages (e.g., by changing SONAMES, or installing in private directories, etc.). While debian-multimedia.org has gained a reputation of providing packages, which were desperately lacking in Debian, IMO this repository has turned into a major source of trouble and pissed users provoking flamewars in the recent past. There is still a number of remaining multimedia-related packages that we still lack in Debian, and pkg-multimedia is working on getting at least the most popular ones packaged and uploaded - help, as always, is of course very appreciated. [2] In summary, I can only advise everyone against enabling that repository on any machine. [1] http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia/FAQ [2] There are also a few additional, non-multimedia related packages, such as acroread and similar non-free stuff. If you really need those, I'd suggest to install them without enabling the repository via apt. -- regards, Reinhard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAJ0cceYKTr9Fgpf9mCCUVpMTQwpZZOtGVKzrA7DroS73!h...@mail.gmail.com
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 04:42:50PM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote: In summary, I can only advise everyone against enabling that repository on any machine. If I would have time to become a pkg-multimedia member I would try to establish installing multimedia applications via metapackages build be the Blends framework. I would most probably drop some file /etc/apt/preferences.d/01-disable-dmo.pref in multimedia-config metapackage (where all other metapackages usually depend from). This would enable those users who really know what they are doing picking singular packages via well defined preferences from d.m.o if needed and prevent users who blindly inject random sources inside their sources.list from killing their system. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120305220409.gg...@an3as.eu
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On 12-03-05 at 11:04pm, Andreas Tille wrote: On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 04:42:50PM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote: In summary, I can only advise everyone against enabling that repository on any machine. If I would have time to become a pkg-multimedia member I would try to establish installing multimedia applications via metapackages build be the Blends framework. I would most probably drop some file /etc/apt/preferences.d/01-disable-dmo.pref in multimedia-config metapackage (where all other metapackages usually depend from). This would enable those users who really know what they are doing picking singular packages via well defined preferences from d.m.o if needed and prevent users who blindly inject random sources inside their sources.list from killing their system. Please let us stop this deroute. Yes, d-m.o is problematic, but so is potentially *any* package cocktail involving unofficial packages. Heck, even involving only official packages but across well-tested-together repositories. Let's not turn this into a witch hunt. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On Di, 06 Mär 2012, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
the Blends framework. I would most probably drop some file
/etc/apt/preferences.d/01-disable-dmo.pref
in multimedia-config metapackage (where all other metapackages usually
And I would file a serious bug against that. There is no reasoning
behind that is in any way reasonable.
Only because these are providing similar packages starting
a hunting down the enemies race is irrational, or even worse,
simply stupid.
Best wishes
Norbert
Norbert Preiningpreining@{jaist.ac.jp, logic.at, debian.org}
JAIST, Japan TeX Live Debian Developer
DSA: 0x09C5B094 fp: 14DF 2E6C 0307 BE6D AD76 A9C0 D2BF 4AA3 09C5 B094
BRADFORD
A school teacher's old hairy jacket, now severely discoloured by chalk
dust, ink, egg and the precipitations of unedifying chemical
reactions.
--- Douglas Adams, The Meaning of Liff
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120306012333.gc27...@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at
