On 2/4/19 11:06 AM, Fred Gleason wrote:
> On Mon, 2019-02-04 at 08:46 -0800, Patrick wrote:
>> What about something in the development installation script that asks
>> if they’d like those repositories and packages installed "at their
>> own risk". It may make it easier for people that want it.
> 
> Seeing as distributing those packages in non-source form is a violation
> of their license terms (see David's earlier post), I think we'd best
> pass on that one.

I heartily advocate honoring third-party library licensing terms.

Fred, I'm curious about your thoughts on enabling the hooks for the
patent-encumbered libraries when building the RPMs for CentOS. I, for
one, would welcome that change to the Rivendell reference distribution.
That way I can decide on a per-installation basis if I want to risk
installing a third-party yum repository.

Would you compile Rivendell with a self-compiled version of libmpeg4v2
and libfaad? If so, would you document the version and configuration
details in the release notes? Sigh. I see how this can quickly get
onerous...

Thanks for your consideration!

  ~David Klann


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
Rivendell-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://caspian.paravelsystems.com/mailman/listinfo/rivendell-dev

Reply via email to