On Nov 11, 2010, at 8:12 PM, Andres Mejia wrote:

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
the LGPL.

Other than that, packages in the NEW queue are getting low priority anyway
because of work underway to deliver a new release of Debian.

So is there no longer a patent issue with LAME? I ask because there are some Pd libraries that use LAME and it would be nice to have them in Debian.



Looking at things from a more basic level, you can come up with a more direct solution... It may sound small in theory, but it in practice, it can change entire economies. - Amy Smith

pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list

Reply via email to