Bug#678795: task-desktop: Flash support should pull in browser-plugin-lightspark

[Joey Hess]

Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 04:11:48PM +0200, Per Olofsson wrote:
> > Thus, I think we should consider removing browser-plugin-gnash from the
> > desktop task (and the gnome metapackage).
> 
> I agree with that.  I only suggested the inclusion of lightspark because
> it made more sense than *only* having gnash, but personally I agree the
> desktop task should not include either.

taskel is not entirely responsible for installing browser-plugin-gnash;
it's a Recommend of gnome.

I had kind of expected to remove flash from the tasks in the release
after this one, but 
does make it seem that it would be at least a small net positive to
remove it now.

-- 
see shy jo


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#678795: task-desktop: Flash support should pull in browser-plugin-lightspark

[Josh Triplett]

On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 04:11:48PM +0200, Per Olofsson wrote:
> Thus, I think we should consider removing browser-plugin-gnash from the
> desktop task (and the gnome metapackage).

I agree with that.  I only suggested the inclusion of lightspark because
it made more sense than *only* having gnash, but personally I agree the
desktop task should not include either.

- Josh Triplett



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#678795: task-desktop: Flash support should pull in browser-plugin-lightspark

[Per Olofsson]

2012-06-27 15:22, Petter Reinholdtsen skrev:
> Actually, you are the one claiming Debian distribute programs
> supporting H.264.  I do not know if that is true.

I am quite certain that it is true. x264 is in Debian main, and its
description reads "video encoder for the H.264/MPEG-4 AVC standard". The
wiki page  also states that
H.264 is included in Debian. Also see the section "Legal Issues" for a
short explanation.

> I avoid using H.264
> files.  I am just pointing out issues I see with providing H.264
> support in Debian.  If you believe these to be non-issues, I can
> understand your arguments, but I fail to see that it is reasonable to
> believe MPEG-LA have no valid patent to base their considerable income
> on. :)

I understand your point, but the fact is that Debian has decided to
start distributing H.264 codecs. I am not the right person to argue
about it :-)

>> In any case, if you don't think Iceweasel should support H.264, then
>> why support H.264 through a Flash plugin in default installs? Why
>> should some software in Debian support H.264 but not Iceweasel's
>>  tag?  Seems inconsistent to me.
> 
> I have not argued here for H.264 support anywhere in Debian, not even
> in Flash.

OK. In any case, H.264 support in Flash is what you get currently if you
install the desktop task, because Gnash uses GStreamer and recommends
gstreamer0.10-ffmpeg which has H.264 support. If you go to YouTube with
Gnash or Lightspark, I believe you will get H.264 videos.

I think what most sites do is that they check if you have Flash, and
then gives you Flash. If Flash works, then you will most likely get
H.264 (Flash does not support WebM). Without Flash, there is at least a
chance of getting WebM, as on YouTube. With other browsers such as
Epiphany and Chromium, you can play H.264 videos using HTML5.

Thus, I think we should consider removing browser-plugin-gnash from the
desktop task (and the gnome metapackage). People who want Flash will
install flashplugin-nonfree anyway.

-- 
Pelle



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#678795: task-desktop: Flash support should pull in browser-plugin-lightspark

[Petter Reinholdtsen]

[Per Olofsson]
> This argument assumes that there are valid patents on H.264 held by
> the MPEG-LA. According to ,
> Debian will not knowingly distribute software encumbered by
> patents. Since Debian is distributing H.264 encoders and decoders,
> that must mean that we are not aware of any patents. If you are
> aware of patents on H.264, then you should probably discuss it with
> pate...@debian.org and not publicly.

Actually, you are the one claiming Debian distribute programs
supporting H.264.  I do not know if that is true.  I avoid using H.264
files.  I am just pointing out issues I see with providing H.264
support in Debian.  If you believe these to be non-issues, I can
understand your arguments, but I fail to see that it is reasonable to
believe MPEG-LA have no valid patent to base their considerable income
on. :)

> In any case, if you don't think Iceweasel should support H.264, then
> why support H.264 through a Flash plugin in default installs? Why
> should some software in Debian support H.264 but not Iceweasel's
>  tag?  Seems inconsistent to me.

I have not argued here for H.264 support anywhere in Debian, not even
in Flash.
-- 
Happy hacking
Petter Reinholdtsen



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#678795: task-desktop: Flash support should pull in browser-plugin-lightspark

[Lennart Sorensen]

On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 03:04:23PM +0200, Per Olofsson wrote:
> This argument assumes that there are valid patents on H.264 held by the
> MPEG-LA. According to , Debian will
> not knowingly distribute software encumbered by patents. Since Debian is
> distributing H.264 encoders and decoders, that must mean that we are not
> aware of any patents. If you are aware of patents on H.264, then you
> should probably discuss it with pate...@debian.org and not publicly.
> 
> In any case, if you don't think Iceweasel should support H.264, then why
> support H.264 through a Flash plugin in default installs? Why should
> some software in Debian support H.264 but not Iceweasel's  tag?
> Seems inconsistent to me.

Debian has H.264 support in anything in main?  I can't think of anything.

non-free sure, and deb-multimedia.org, but debian main?

-- 
Len Sorensen



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#678795: task-desktop: Flash support should pull in browser-plugin-lightspark

[Per Olofsson]

2012-06-27 15:11, Lennart Sorensen skrev:
> Debian has H.264 support in anything in main?  I can't think of anything.
> 
> non-free sure, and deb-multimedia.org, but debian main?

http://packages.debian.org/sid/x264

http://packages.debian.org/sid/libavcodec53

-- 
Pelle



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#678795: task-desktop: Flash support should pull in browser-plugin-lightspark

[Per Olofsson]

2012-06-27 14:20, Petter Reinholdtsen skrev:
>> > Since Debian already includes H.264 support, surely it would be
>> > better if Iceweasel could use it directly instead of relying on a
>> > Flash plugin.
> I am not convinced it is better for Debian to help increase the
> liability of people publishing video on the web, by increasing the
> user base for H.264, given that the cain of taxes listed in
> http://webmink.com/essays/h-264/ > will affect us all:
> 
>  * Those creating H.264 video need approval from MPEG-LA
>  * Those streaming H.264 video need approval from MPEG-LA
>  * Those creating players for H.264 video need approval from MPEG-LA
> 
> And approval can cost money and require user counting.  Only those
> using the players as individual persons have been granted approval
> from MPEG-LA until at least 2015.
> 
> Supporting H.264 in browsers increases the preassure of those that
> want to avoid the video tax, and I sure hope Debian will not be part
> of that.

This argument assumes that there are valid patents on H.264 held by the
MPEG-LA. According to , Debian will
not knowingly distribute software encumbered by patents. Since Debian is
distributing H.264 encoders and decoders, that must mean that we are not
aware of any patents. If you are aware of patents on H.264, then you
should probably discuss it with pate...@debian.org and not publicly.

In any case, if you don't think Iceweasel should support H.264, then why
support H.264 through a Flash plugin in default installs? Why should
some software in Debian support H.264 but not Iceweasel's  tag?
Seems inconsistent to me.

-- 
Pelle



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#678795: task-desktop: Flash support should pull in browser-plugin-lightspark

[Petter Reinholdtsen]

[Per Olofsson]
> It seemed to me that Firefox/Iceweasel was going to start supporting
> H.264,[1] but perhaps I was mistaken.

I sure hope neither is going to support H.264 as part of HTML5
.

> Since Debian already includes H.264 support, surely it would be
> better if Iceweasel could use it directly instead of relying on a
> Flash plugin.

I am not convinced it is better for Debian to help increase the
liability of people publishing video on the web, by increasing the
user base for H.264, given that the cain of taxes listed in
http://webmink.com/essays/h-264/ > will affect us all:

 * Those creating H.264 video need approval from MPEG-LA
 * Those streaming H.264 video need approval from MPEG-LA
 * Those creating players for H.264 video need approval from MPEG-LA

And approval can cost money and require user counting.  Only those
using the players as individual persons have been granted approval
from MPEG-LA until at least 2015.

Supporting H.264 in browsers increases the preassure of those that
want to avoid the video tax, and I sure hope Debian will not be part
of that.

-- 
Happy hacking
Petter Reinholdtsen



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#678795: task-desktop: Flash support should pull in browser-plugin-lightspark

[Per Olofsson]

2012-06-27 13:36, Petter Reinholdtsen skrev:
> Which browser are you using?

Chromium and Iceweasel.

> Given that HTML5 browsers either support H.264 or (Ogg Theora and
> WebM), and most of the video sites on the web only provide H.264, I
> guess it is a matter of browser choice if HTML5 work better than Flash
> or not.

Right... I only tried YouTube in Iceweasel and forgot about YouTube
having WebM. Sorry.

It seemed to me that Firefox/Iceweasel was going to start supporting
H.264,[1] but perhaps I was mistaken.

Since Debian already includes H.264 support, surely it would be better
if Iceweasel could use it directly instead of relying on a Flash plugin.

[1]
http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/19/mozilla-caves-will-support-h-264-to-avoid-irrelevance/

-- 
Pelle



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#678795: task-desktop: Flash support should pull in browser-plugin-lightspark

[Petter Reinholdtsen]

[Per Olofsson]
> Gnash plays YouTube videos better than Lightspark. With only Gnash
> installed, YouTube works better. I belive YT is the most important
> Flash site. Having no Flash plugin forces HTML5 mode, and the HTML5
> player works *much* better than either Gnash or
> Lightspark. Unfortunately, not all videos are playable (due to ads).

Which browser are you using?

Given that HTML5 browsers either support H.264 or (Ogg Theora and
WebM), and most of the video sites on the web only provide H.264, I
guess it is a matter of browser choice if HTML5 work better than Flash
or not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML5_video > have more details on
HTML5 video format support in browsers, and
http://webmink.com/essays/h-264/ > for background information on
the legal problems with H.264.

> The big drawback with not shipping a Flash plugin is that many
> YouTube videos won't work. But perhaps they will start work in the
> future once Google has added ad support to the HTML5 player?

Perhaps.  Or perhaps not. :)

I am not very optimistic.

-- 
Happy hacking
Petter Reinholdtsen



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#678795: task-desktop: Flash support should pull in browser-plugin-lightspark

[Per Olofsson]

2012-06-27 13:12, Per Olofsson skrev:
> I think we should consider removing Flash entirely, instead of shipping
> a plugin that only works sometimes and stops superior HTML5 players from
> appearing. I think Flash is a dying technology that will be replaced by
> HTML5 in time. When wheezy has been released, more sites will probably
> have HTML5 support and the support will continue to grow. Flash support,
> OTOH, can only get worse over time since the plugin will not be updated
> after the wheezy release and things might break.
> 
> The big drawback with not shipping a Flash plugin is that many YouTube
> videos won't work. But perhaps they will start work in the future once
> Google has added ad support to the HTML5 player?

Oh, and with "shipping", I mean including it in the desktop task. I have
no problem with having Flash plugins in the archive.

-- 
Pelle



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#678795: task-desktop: Flash support should pull in browser-plugin-lightspark

[Per Olofsson]

2012-06-27 07:34, Christian PERRIER skrev:
> Am I correct concluding that we can safely add
> browser-plugin-lightspark to the desktop task?

IMHO, no.

Gnash plays YouTube videos better than Lightspark. With only Gnash
installed, YouTube works better. I belive YT is the most important Flash
site. Having no Flash plugin forces HTML5 mode, and the HTML5 player
works *much* better than either Gnash or Lightspark. Unfortunately, not
all videos are playable (due to ads).

If you go to a ted.com video with Lightspark, you will get an ugly error
message ("We're sorry, Lightspark encountered a yet unsupported Flash
file ..."). However, with gnash or no Flash plugin, you get a message
about having an old Flash player and you are instead offered a download
link. If you click the link, you get the built-in HTML5 player (or
Totem) and can watch the video.

vimeo.com. Neither works, but lightspark crashes. Disabling the Flash
plugin forces the HTML5 player that works fine.

JW Player: Lightspark crashes. Gnash doesn't work. Disabling Flash
forces HTML5 player that works.

Lightspark seems to crash a lot while gnash handles things more
gracefully even when it doesn't work.

I think we should consider removing Flash entirely, instead of shipping
a plugin that only works sometimes and stops superior HTML5 players from
appearing. I think Flash is a dying technology that will be replaced by
HTML5 in time. When wheezy has been released, more sites will probably
have HTML5 support and the support will continue to grow. Flash support,
OTOH, can only get worse over time since the plugin will not be updated
after the wheezy release and things might break.

The big drawback with not shipping a Flash plugin is that many YouTube
videos won't work. But perhaps they will start work in the future once
Google has added ad support to the HTML5 player?

-- 
Pelle



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#678795: task-desktop: Flash support should pull in browser-plugin-lightspark

[Didier 'OdyX' Raboud]

Le mercredi, 27 juin 2012 07.34:20, Christian PERRIER a écrit :
> 
> Thanks for the detailed answer.
> 
> Am I correct concluding that we can safely add
> browser-plugin-lightspark to the desktop task?

My opinion as maintainer is that is is safe to do so _provided_ lightspark 
gets more bugs filed; ironically. Due to the nature of both the lightspark 
project and Youtube (and other flash-relying websites), the combination of 
both will be broken over time. This brokenness needs to be documented as bugs 
in the Debian BTS for it to have a chance to be fixed. 

(CC'ing debian-release@ for opinions on the following)

My main concern is that a useful lightspark will need rather frequent updates, 
even in stable. I think it's better to have a semi-working not-totally-stable 
free flash player than letting our users rely on Adobe's. Release Team: would 
a more liberal upgrade policy be acceptable for lightspark ?

Cheers,

OdyX


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Bug#678795: task-desktop: Flash support should pull in browser-plugin-lightspark

[Christian PERRIER]

Quoting Gabriele Giacone (1o5g4...@gmail.com):
> [ CC'ing Didier actual lightspark maintainer, not subscribed ]
> 
> On 06/26/2012 05:13 PM, Touko Korpela wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 12:27:21PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> >> [Christian PERRIER]
> >>> So both can coexist peacefully?
> >>
> >> I believe so.  I have not checked it myself, but know there were talk about
> >> having lightspark calling gnash when it found AVM1 flash files.  Not sure
> >> if both browsers plugin should be installed, or only the lightspark one
> >> and the gnash standalone program.
> > 
> > Flash maintainers, can you tell about compatibility of these plugins
> > and what packages should be installed by default in wheezy?
> 
> They coexist and are complementary to provide a full flash experience.
> By installing browser-plugin-lightspark, it recommends gnash standalone
> so they are both installed and as Petter said LS falls back to gnash if
> flash is AVM1.
> 
> Currently LS supports these [SITES] i.e. BBC News and partially
> Grooveshark, Google StreetView, Youtube.
> Youtube is the most visited and is a special case: if site detects
> gnash, it provides an AVM1 video player gnash can play very well,
> otherwise an AVM2 one LS plays with some limitations (progress bar is
> unusable, changing volume level is pretty hard, no fullscreen).
> Moreover to play yt movies better it would also need current [LIBXML++]
> patched and xul-ext-adblock-plus is more than recommended, without it
> many videos don't start due to ads lightspark can't play. IIRC that
> affects BBC site too.
> I think ideal would be forcing LS fall back to gnash also if site is
> youtube. No idea about how to implement that.
> An alternative could be also installing browser-plugin-gnash to make
> possible at least easily switching between them through alternatives
> system (e.g. b-p-lightspark Recommends b-p-gnash instead of gnash).

Thanks for the detailed answer.

Am I correct concluding that we can safely add
browser-plugin-lightspark to the desktop task?




signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#678795: task-desktop: Flash support should pull in browser-plugin-lightspark

[Gabriele Giacone]

[ CC'ing Didier actual lightspark maintainer, not subscribed ]

On 06/26/2012 05:13 PM, Touko Korpela wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 12:27:21PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>> [Christian PERRIER]
>>> So both can coexist peacefully?
>>
>> I believe so.  I have not checked it myself, but know there were talk about
>> having lightspark calling gnash when it found AVM1 flash files.  Not sure
>> if both browsers plugin should be installed, or only the lightspark one
>> and the gnash standalone program.
> 
> Flash maintainers, can you tell about compatibility of these plugins
> and what packages should be installed by default in wheezy?

They coexist and are complementary to provide a full flash experience.
By installing browser-plugin-lightspark, it recommends gnash standalone
so they are both installed and as Petter said LS falls back to gnash if
flash is AVM1.

Currently LS supports these [SITES] i.e. BBC News and partially
Grooveshark, Google StreetView, Youtube.
Youtube is the most visited and is a special case: if site detects
gnash, it provides an AVM1 video player gnash can play very well,
otherwise an AVM2 one LS plays with some limitations (progress bar is
unusable, changing volume level is pretty hard, no fullscreen).
Moreover to play yt movies better it would also need current [LIBXML++]
patched and xul-ext-adblock-plus is more than recommended, without it
many videos don't start due to ads lightspark can't play. IIRC that
affects BBC site too.
I think ideal would be forcing LS fall back to gnash also if site is
youtube. No idea about how to implement that.
An alternative could be also installing browser-plugin-gnash to make
possible at least easily switching between them through alternatives
system (e.g. b-p-lightspark Recommends b-p-gnash instead of gnash).


[SITES] https://github.com/lightspark/lightspark/wiki/Site-Support
[LIBXML++] http://bugs.debian.org/664709

-- 
Gabriele



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#678795: task-desktop: Flash support should pull in browser-plugin-lightspark

[Touko Korpela]

On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 12:27:21PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Christian PERRIER]
> > So both can coexist peacefully?
> 
> I believe so.  I have not checked it myself, but know there were talk about
> having lightspark calling gnash when it found AVM1 flash files.  Not sure
> if both browsers plugin should be installed, or only the lightspark one
> and the gnash standalone program.

Flash maintainers, can you tell about compatibility of these plugins
and what packages should be installed by default in wheezy?



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#678795: task-desktop: Flash support should pull in browser-plugin-lightspark

[Petter Reinholdtsen]

[Christian PERRIER]
> So both can coexist peacefully?

I believe so.  I have not checked it myself, but know there were talk about
having lightspark calling gnash when it found AVM1 flash files.  Not sure
if both browsers plugin should be installed, or only the lightspark one
and the gnash standalone program.
-- 
Happy hacking
Petter Reinholdtsen



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#678795: task-desktop: Flash support should pull in browser-plugin-lightspark

[Christian PERRIER]

Quoting Josh Triplett (j...@joshtriplett.org):
> Package: tasksel
> Version: 3.10
> Severity: normal
> 
> Supporting modern Flash files requires browser-plugin-lightspark, not
> just browser-plugin-gnash.  Please consider depending on both.


So both can coexist peacefully?

CC'in Petter Reinholdtsen who has always been the one pushing for good
Flash support (with his SkoleLinix^W DebianEdu hat).




signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#678795: task-desktop: Flash support should pull in browser-plugin-lightspark

[Josh Triplett]

Package: tasksel
Version: 3.10
Severity: normal

Supporting modern Flash files requires browser-plugin-lightspark, not
just browser-plugin-gnash.  Please consider depending on both.

- Josh Triplett

-- System Information:
Debian Release: wheezy/sid
  APT prefers unstable
  APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)

Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=C.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=C.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash

Versions of packages tasksel depends on:
ii  aptitude0.6.8-1
ii  debconf [debconf-2.0]   1.5.44
ii  liblocale-gettext-perl  1.05-7+b1
pn  tasksel-data

tasksel recommends no packages.

tasksel suggests no packages.



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org