Andrea Mennucc wrote: > I have uploaded a new version of the 'mplayer' package for Debian, > namely version 1.0pre6-1
I have reviewed this package, but I've not tried building it. Here are my first comments, split under your headings. > --- HISTORY and CURRENT STATUS=20 The README.Debian refers to diffs on a site tonelli.sns.it but I couldn't find them. Would running the cvs-changelog and storing the output help to comply with the letter as well as spirit of the GPL? debianizer - isn't there a debian/rules way to do this now? libmpcodecs - missing copyright or are these all but one mplayer creations? TOOLS - all of this is deleted in response to a reply about one file, or do they really intend them all to be non-free? debian/scripts/win32codecs.sh - does this depend on non-free software? > --- PLEA I hear your plea and I am only commenting about the things I feel comfortable commenting on. I *am* worried about the patent problems and the EUCD problems, but I'm not expert enough on video to comment well. I wouldn't be surprised if they are worrying enough to prevent parts ever getting into main. > --- POPULAR SUPPORT While it's nice to see that developers are so keen for mplayer to be worked on, I hope that someone is directing them towards the historical record and the work which still needs to be done. I only saw it happen in one of the cited threads. I think that explaining this to everyone is one of the main challenges for the mplayer package maintainers and you should add a bit more about it to README.Debian, mentioning investigation_0.90 (does that get included in the /usr/share/doc?) > --- HISTORY Is it really necessary to fan dead flames by calling them such in the README.Debian? Let bygones be bygones? -- Thanks for your work on this, MJR/slef http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
