Re: video codecs in HTML 5

I demand that Sam Morris may or may not have written... > On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 12:26:25 -0500, Steve Greenland wrote: >> That's all true, but if the standard requires (or recommends) MPEG4 >> support, then that's what everyone will use, and we'll be screwed, > It's probably more accurate to say th

Re: video codecs in HTML 5

On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 12:26:25 -0500, Steve Greenland wrote: > That's all true, but if the standard requires (or recommends) MPEG4 > support, then that's what everyone will use, and we'll be screwed, It's probably more accurate to say that no matter what the standard says, Microsoft will ignore it

Re: Results for General Resolution: Altering package upload rules

On Sat, 24 Mar 2007, Ben Finney wrote: > So, why does the vote result show a number of votes which has no > relevance to the number of votes that actually affected the result? Because later votes superceed earlier ones. > In other words, why is the unqualified "number of votes" in the > report no

Re: video codecs in HTML 5

On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 04:43:52PM +0100, Maik Merten wrote: > Romain Beauxis schrieb: > > I don't agree, you'll always have the threat of an abusing patent that > > claims > > that some algorithm you designed were "owned" by it.. Have you ever looked > > at > > the JPEG processing for example

Re: Results for General Resolution: Altering package upload rules

"cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Friday 23 March 2007, Ben Finney wrote: > > If it's not counted, why is it counted (i.e. appearing in the > > count of votes)? > > AIUI your confusing 2 different counts: > - the count of "# valid votes made" > - the count of "# valid v

Re: Bug#413575: debian-policy: New virtual package: dictd-dictionary

retitle 413575 [ACCEPTED] debian-policy: New virtual package: dictd-dictionary thanks On March 8, 2007 at 8:49PM +0600, dottedmag (at dottedmag.net) wrote: > Twas brillig at 22:49:55 08.03.2007 UTC+09 when Tatsuya Kinoshita did gyre > and gimble: > > TK> Again, I recommend to add the virtual pa

Re: "Mozilla" plugins to depend upon virtual "mozilla-plugin-browser"?

On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 11:34:17PM +0100, Harald Dunkel wrote: > Hi folks, > > Would it be possible that the "Mozilla" plugins depend upon > a virtual mozilla-plugin-browser package? All browsers with > the same plugin interface could provide this feature, and > foreign browsers would not be kept

"Mozilla" plugins to depend upon virtual "mozilla-plugin-browser"?

Hi folks, Would it be possible that the "Mozilla" plugins depend upon a virtual mozilla-plugin-browser package? All browsers with the same plugin interface could provide this feature, and foreign browsers would not be kept out. Many thanx in advance Harri -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL P

Re: video codecs in HTML 5

On 3/24/07, Maik Merten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ignoring patents can be dangerous, though. If you get sued and the suing party can prove you knew of those patents you can get punished even harder AFAIK (IANAL!). In case of Debian vs. MPEG they could simply point to the mailing lists where the

Bug#416005: ITP: xgawk -- Extensible AWK, with XML and PgSQL support

Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Pawel Wiecek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Package name: xgawk Version : 3.1.5-beta.20060401 Upstream Author : Andrew J. Schorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Juergen Kahrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://home.vrweb.de/~juerg

Re: ITA/RFS: libspf2 -- Sender Policy Framework library, written in C

On Friday 23 March 2007 20:53, Mike Hommey wrote: > On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 08:23:38PM +0100, Magnus Holmgren > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: (...) > > Have not taken a look at the package, but does the short description > > > Description: Sender Policy Framework library, written in C > > really have

Re: But youthful

We told you watch NNYR Yesterday +25% in 1 day It.s only just begun Northamerican Energy Group Corp. Symbol : NNYR 5 day Expected : $0.50 ( 500% profit ) Get in tomorrow or get left out!! This is going to double in next 2 days Real Comp with Real Products Get in tomorrow or be left out!! The Wo

Re: ITA/RFS: libspf2 -- Sender Policy Framework library, written in C

On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 08:23:38PM +0100, Magnus Holmgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: (...) Have not taken a look at the package, but does the short description > Description: Sender Policy Framework library, written in C really have to say "written in C" ? Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [

Re: ITA/RFS: libspf2 -- Sender Policy Framework library, written in C

Hi, I am a bit irritated by the following sentence in README.Debian-source: | It's completely out of date anyway. Could you please explain? Greetings Martin -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] /root]# man real-life No manual entry for real-life -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subjec

ITA/RFS: libspf2 -- Sender Policy Framework library, written in C

retitle 372629 ITA: libspf2 -- Sender Policy Framework library, written in C owner 372629 [EMAIL PROTECTED] thanks I have created a new version of libspf2 and intend to adopt it if I can find a sponsor (and/or co-maintainer). It fixes (hopefully) all outstanding bugs except one. 20_64bit_types.p

Re: video codecs in HTML 5

Steve Greenland schrieb: > That's all true, but if the standard requires (or recommends) MPEG4 > support, then that's what everyone will use, and we'll be screwed, > again. If we (the Free Software community) can get Ogg-Theora listed as > the base requirement (or recommendation), then we have a sm

Re: video codecs in HTML 5

On 23-Mar-07, 11:54 (CDT), Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Your second paragraph above doesn't follow from your first. Even if the > standard for says to use MPEG4, I assume that it will follow the > same model as the rest of HTTP and the video will be a separate object > with its own

Re: video codecs in HTML 5

Maik Merten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Recently Apple joined the discussion and questioned if the Ogg formats > should get such a recommendation ( > http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2007-March/010392.html > ). The following discussion implies Apple wants to see MPEG4 being us

Re: video codecs in HTML 5

Josselin Mouette schrieb: > Thanks for these precisions. I'm glad I could help to shed some light on that. > I am still convinced that we should ignore patents entirely, but this > isn't a consensus in the project, so the issues with h.264 remain the > same as those of DivX et al. Yeah, sadly it

Re: video codecs in HTML 5

Le vendredi 23 mars 2007 à 16:16 +0100, Maik Merten a écrit : > Yeah, he might be referring to the Qualcomm case. Qualcomm sued Broadcom > for patent infringement and lost. > > It seems the court also recommended invalidating that patent. > > Now, that's one special patent that was questioned her

Re: video codecs in HTML 5

Romain Beauxis schrieb: > I don't agree, you'll always have the threat of an abusing patent that claims > that some algorithm you designed were "owned" by it.. Have you ever looked at > the JPEG processing for example ? It is simply a fourier transform followed > by an huffman compression... All

Re: video codecs in HTML 5

Le vendredi 23 mars 2007 16:10, Maik Merten a écrit : > If somehow possible the WHATWG should adopt a free format and I think > it's in the best interest of Debian to bringing this to the WHATWG's > attention. I don't agree, you'll always have the threat of an abusing patent that claims that some

Re: video codecs in HTML 5

Maik Merten schrieb: > If you ship more than 50.000 decoders (easily bypassed by some Linux > distributions) they'll charge you 0.25$ per decoder. If you happen to > ship more than 50.000 encoders: Again, 0.25$. > > They even charge for encoded content. > > ( Taken from http://www.mpegla.com/m4v/

Re: video codecs in HTML 5

Reinhard Tartler schrieb: > Maybe he is referring to [1] (found via [2])? > > [1] > http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20070127--1b27verdict.html > [2] > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264 Yeah, he might be referring to the Qualcomm case. Qualcomm sued Broadcom for patent infringeme

Re: video codecs in HTML 5

Romain Beauxis schrieb: > This always the same story.. > Patents are registered 'a priori', and owning a patent does not implies that > it is justified in any ways. Patents must be treated as a threat, not a legal > binding that will enforced by the law. Patents that were granted are a valid ba

Re: video codecs in HTML 5

Maik Merten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Josselin Mouette schrieb: >> Maybe it would be a good idea to push h.264 now the related patents have >> been invalidated. It provides a much better compression level than Ogg >> Theora. > > I didn't hear anything of H.264 related patents having been inval

This e-mail address is no longer in use

Dear User, This e-mail address is no longer in use. Please contact our Support Team by using the links on the site where you purchased your music. If you are unable to access the site, or have forgotten where you purchased your music, you can e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: video codecs in HTML 5

Le vendredi 23 mars 2007 14:46, Maik Merten a écrit : > Romain Beauxis schrieb: > > Well, check for mpeg4 decoders in main archive.. > > I think you are missunderstanding his point, because a patent is not > > directly related to the freeness of the code. > > If we were to remove all software that

Re: video codecs in HTML 5

Romain Beauxis schrieb: > Well, check for mpeg4 decoders in main archive.. > I think you are missunderstanding his point, because a patent is not directly > related to the freeness of the code. > If we were to remove all software that is subject ot patent threats, we would > remove most of our a

Re: video codecs in HTML 5

Le vendredi 23 mars 2007 14:11, Maik Merten a écrit : > > Fortunately not. We have free MPEG-4 decoders, thanks. > > I don't consider this to be true. > > Can you give a source supporting your theory? Well, check for mpeg4 decoders in main archive.. I think you are missunderstanding his point, bec

Re: video codecs in HTML 5

Josselin Mouette schrieb: > Maybe it would be a good idea to push h.264 now the related patents have > been invalidated. It provides a much better compression level than Ogg > Theora. I didn't hear anything of H.264 related patents having been invalidated (by what court? In what country?). To my k

Re: video codecs in HTML 5

Le vendredi 23 mars 2007 à 12:41 +0100, Maik Merten a écrit : > | User agents should support Ogg Theora video and Ogg Vorbis audio, as > | well as the Ogg container format. [THEORA] [VORBIS] [OGG]" > > This basically means the free Ogg formats, which are included in Debian > already, form a basic

Re: release update: d-i schedule, release notes, deep freeze

Luk Claes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi, > > You might not remember who the release team is, but we still want to > inform you about the final leg of the etch release cycle. Our original > schedule did not work out due to problems with the kernel and the > slower than expected reduction of rel

Re: Results for General Resolution: Altering package upload rules

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/23/07 05:41, Steve Langasek wrote: [snip] > > http://www.debian.org/vote/2007/suppl_002_stats: > > Ballots Received MIME Decoded Passed Sig Check Passed LDAP Check Votes > Tallied Rejects Sent > 313 313 270

Re: Problems packaging a kernel using cdbs

Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 17:03:46 -0400, Luis R Rodriguez > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > >> My goal is to actually generate a debian package which will have a >> very small x86 kernel and a very very custom initramfs (bundles of >> software) for a PXE boo

Re: auditd -- User space tools for 2.6 kernel SELinux auditing

On Friday 23 March 2007 05:42, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would prefer you do move it back to /sbin. A number of > SELinux tools are moving to depend on audit, and some of these do > require them to be functional before the other file systems are > mounted. I can liv

Re: so fe

We told you watch NNYR Yesterday +25% in 1 day It.s only just begun Northamerican Energy Group Corp. Symbol : NNYR 5 day Expected : $0.50 ( 500% profit ) Get in tomorrow or get left out!! This is going to double in next 2 days Real Comp with Real Products Get in tomorrow or be left out!! you or

Re: co-mentor for a GSoC proposal wanted: debbugs web submission

Hi, On Thursday 22 March 2007 13:55, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: > Hmmm, if we do that, we could probably start handing out accounts for > this web-based bug submission system, so that people who report more > than one bug only need to answer once to such a mail. Hmmm, that sounds > like we're r

video codecs in HTML 5

Hi, I'm new to this list, so hello. I'm not a Debian developer, but I think I should bring something to your attention that may impact badly on Debian. The WHATWG ( http://www.whatwg.org/ - that's mostly Apple, Opera and Mozilla) are currently discussing an extension to HTML - the element. The b

Re: What packagemanager is to be presupposed?

On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 11:23:45AM +0100, Roman Müllenschläder wrote: > The decision which packages should be 'suggested' and which should > be 'recommended' depends on what frontend is supposed as 'standard'. > > What is beeing considered as 'standard'? The definition in Policy is what you shou

Re: Results for General Resolution: Altering package upload rules

On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 10:28:04AM +, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > > > On pe, 2007-03-23 at 10:32 +0100, BALLABIO GERARDO wrote: > > > > Debian Project Secretary wrote: > > > > > At the end of voting, with 313 Ballots resulting in 260 votes from 257 > > > > developers, "General Resolution: Altering

Re: Results for General Resolution: Altering package upload rules

On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 09:05:10PM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On pe, 2007-03-23 at 10:32 +0100, BALLABIO GERARDO wrote: > > > Debian Project Secretary wrote: > > > > At the end of voting, with 313 Ballots resulting in 260 votes from 257 > > > develo

Re: Results for General Resolution: Altering package upload rules

On Friday 23 March 2007, Ben Finney wrote: > Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On pe, 2007-03-23 at 10:32 +0100, BALLABIO GERARDO wrote: > > > Debian Project Secretary wrote: > > > > At the end of voting, with 313 Ballots resulting in 260 votes from > > > > 257 > > > > > > developers,

Re: Results for General Resolution: Altering package upload rules

On pe, 2007-03-23 at 21:05 +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On pe, 2007-03-23 at 10:32 +0100, BALLABIO GERARDO wrote: > > > Debian Project Secretary wrote: > > > > At the end of voting, with 313 Ballots resulting in 260 votes from 257 > > > developers, "G

What packagemanager is to be presupposed?

Hi there ... The different frontends (apt, dpkg, aptitude, ...) behave different in consideration of installing 'recommends'. The decision which packages should be 'suggested' and which should be 'recommended' depends on what frontend is supposed as 'standard'. What is beeing considered as 'st

Re: Results for General Resolution: Altering package upload rules

Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On pe, 2007-03-23 at 10:32 +0100, BALLABIO GERARDO wrote: > > Debian Project Secretary wrote: > > > At the end of voting, with 313 Ballots resulting in 260 votes from 257 > > developers, "General Resolution: Altering package upload rules" has > > carrie

Re: Results for General Resolution: Altering package upload rules

On pe, 2007-03-23 at 10:32 +0100, BALLABIO GERARDO wrote: > Debian Project Secretary wrote: > > At the end of voting, with 313 Ballots resulting in 260 votes from 257 > developers, "General Resolution: Altering package upload rules" has > carried the day. > > Please forgive me if this is a stupid

Re: Results for General Resolution: Altering package upload rules

Debian Project Secretary wrote: > At the end of voting, with 313 Ballots resulting in 260 votes from 257 developers, "General Resolution: Altering package upload rules" has carried the day. Please forgive me if this is a stupid question, but how can there be more votes than voters? Gerardo

Re: Debian admin, keyring-maint and Request Tracker

also sprach James Troup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007.03.23.0255 +0100]: > o [EMAIL PROTECTED] (for keyring-maint) > > or > > o [EMAIL PROTECTED] (for DSA) > > **NB:** You must put the phrase 'Debian RT' somewhere in the subject > line (case doesn't matter)[1]. Is this "spam protection" and thus

Re: Debian admin, keyring-maint and Request Tracker

Hi, James Troup wrote: > Other teams > - --- > > If any other teams/groups want to use rt.debian.org to track their > requests, they're welcome to do so, just send us the details in an RT > ticket for DSA. What about the ftpmasters? (As you are ftpmaster anyway, you probably don't need a