On Thursday 11 November 2010 19:05:51 Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
> Anyone know the story behind the 'lame' package in the NEW queue? will
> it get included? did the patent stuff change? I'd like to package some
> stuff that depends on it.
I haven't heard anything new related to lame. There's only the issue with
inconsistency as far as what license terms lame is distributed under. All
sources have standard LGPL header. A file named 'LICENSE' says lame is under
LGPL. There is, however, a README file that includes 2 extra terms on top of
Other than that, packages in the NEW queue are getting low priority anyway
because of work underway to deliver a new release of Debian.
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list