Re: mplayer, the time has come
Ken Bloom wrote: On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 11:46:38 +0100, A Mennucc wrote: There have been two main problems keeping mplayer out of Debian: licenses and copyrights. Licenses: the upstream code contains some code that is protected by (more or less) actively enforced licenses: DeCSS code to decode encrypted dvd; ffmpeg and OpenDivx code to en/decode MPEG4. Solution: the DeCSS is deleted from the package proposed for Debian What functionality do we lose by doing this? my packaging of mplayer will play DVDs using libdvdread3 (exactly as xine does) the DeCSS code inside mplayer is (considered by the upstream authors to be) more optimized and faster ; but including it is troublesome, so the upstream mplayer allows for the deletion of it and the fallback on libdvdread3 a. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Fwd: Re: mplayer, the time has come]
sorry I sent this reply to the wrong list I also add two missing answers MJ Ray wrote: Andrea Mennucc wrote: I have uploaded a new version of the 'mplayer' package for Debian, namely version 1.0pre6-1 I have reviewed this package, but I've not tried building it. Here are my first comments, split under your headings. --- HISTORY and CURRENT STATUS=20 The README.Debian refers to diffs on a site tonelli.sns.it but I couldn't find them. my fault , I forgot anyway there are no interesting 'small' differences; all differences are 'big' : deletion of whole directories; moreover the upstream debian/ is replaced by mine, which is incomparable (I renamed the files, and rebuilt some from scratch) Would running the cvs-changelog and storing the output help to comply with the letter as well as spirit of the GPL? I dont know :-) debianizer - isn't there a debian/rules way to do this now? no way at all suppose that I do this: $ tar xjf MPlayer-1.0pre6.tar.bz2 $ mv MPlayer-1.0pre6 mplayer-1.0pre6 $ tar czf mplayer_1.0pre6.orig.tar.gz at this point I am dead: the file mplayer_1.0pre6.orig.tar.gz will contain DeCSS code, and nothing in debian/rules can delete this code from mplayer_1.0pre6.orig.tar.gz libmpcodecs - missing copyright or are these all but one mplayer creations? they are mplayer creations (at the best of my knowledge) TOOLS - all of this is deleted in response to a reply about one file, or do they really intend them all to be non-free? when I looked in it 2 years ago, I saw that many files did not have proper copyright statements in them. Since I am not packaging anything from TOOLS, I took the radical step to delete them debian/scripts/win32codecs.sh - does this depend on non-free software? nope it will download and install codecs that are non-free; but it is the user choice (and responsibility) to do that. This is no different than what libdvdread3 proposed wrt decss library, or xanim with codecs --- POPULAR SUPPORT While it's nice to see that developers are so keen for mplayer to be worked on, I hope that someone is directing them towards the historical record and the work which still needs to be done. I only saw it happen in one of the cited threads. I think that explaining this to everyone is one of the main challenges for the mplayer package maintainers and you should add a bit more about it to README.Debian, mentioning investigation_0.90 (does that get included in the /usr/share/doc?) investigation_0.90 is outdated: after 0.90 the upstream authors did their own investigation and prepared the 'Copyright' file --- HISTORY Is it really necessary to fan dead flames by calling them such in the README.Debian? Let bygones be bygones? you sure are right a.
Re: [Fwd: Re: mplayer, the time has come]
MJ Ray wrote: Please don't cc me or send me HTML duplicates (see also debian lists code of conduct). Thanks to Henning Makholm for replying already with some answers I couldn't remember. I agree with all of that post. Further, it looks like this doesn't need to be a native package. a. wrote: MJR wrote: debian/scripts/win32codecs.sh - does this depend on non-free software? nope it will download and install codecs that are non-free; but it is the user choice (and responsibility) to do that. This is no different than what libdvdread3 proposed wrt decss library, or xanim with codecs I think this is the only remaining point I want to comment on now. Looking at your examples: xanim is non-free, isn't it? I'll skip that one. ok I didn't remember the libdvdcss2 situation. It seems it's not kept out because it's not free software, but because of other problems which make it undistributable on the main mirrors, thanks to EUCD, DMCA and similar laws. The ITP is bug 154281 and one list thread is http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2002/07/msg01640.html Some aspects of the ITP listing worry me, but the upshot seems to be that if ftpmasters or mirror owners are still worried, someone should ask the DPL or SPI or someone to buy legal advice. you should compare mplayer and the win32codecs.sh which installs win32codecs to libdvdread3 and the installer which installs libdvdcss2 both libdvdread3 and mplayer can do a lot of work without extra installs and libdvdread3 is in main, so I think mplayer should be as well So, this looks like a different situation to win32codecs.sh to me. How does this downloader script differ from f-prot-installer in contrib? Both depend on some non-free software they download. nope. f-prot-installer is just meant to install f-prot, and is not useful in itself mplayer does not _depend_ on win32 codecs. It will run perfectly well without. a. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [Fwd: Re: mplayer, the time has come]
Henning Makholm wrote: Scripsit A Mennucc [EMAIL PROTECTED] debianizer - isn't there a debian/rules way to do this now? no way at all Yes way. Look up the documentation of 'debian/rules get-orig-source' in policy. sorry there was a deep misunderstanding here I thought you meant: is there a way to tweak in debian/rules so that the targets called by 'dpkg-buildpackage' or 'debuild' would also clean the .orig.tar.gz ? what you mean is : what about adding a target 'get-orig-source' in debian rules that downloads and prepares a proper .orig.tar.gz ? the former is not reasonable, the latter is in the policy when I looked in it 2 years ago, I saw that many files did not have proper copyright statements in them. Since I am not packaging anything from TOOLS, I took the radical step to delete them Ideally, repackaged source should only omit subsystems that we have a good reason to omit. Ideally, mplayer should have entered Debian some two years ago. This is not an ideal world. In this real world, mplayer is not in the archive, and my first priority is getting it in there. One of the main issues was the lack of proper copyrights ; when I looked in TOOLS I saw a lot of code which is missing proper copyright and autorship statements: I deleted it. When and if mplayer is ever accepted, I will go and track autorship and copyrights of that stuff. And a new skin for gmplayer, as well. Too radical deletion is a disservice to users who use the Debian sources to build things and who might have a use for those things. keeping the whole mplayer out of Debian is a MAJOR disservice to our users; yet nobody (who is in charge of anything) in Debian is caring and you tell me about users who might have a use for those things ? If you care about users who might have a use for those things then help me getting mplayer inside Debian. If they are in the upstream sources and free enough for us to ship in the source package, we should ship them in the source package. If mplayer is so free, so why is it so darn difficult to have it in Debian??? a. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Let's stop feeding the NVidia cuckoo
Andrew Suffield wrote: Intermediate cases require the exercise of judgement, as always. A photograph of the Eiffel Tower is probably the best we're going to get; there's only one of them and it won't fit in the archive. A photograph of a PCB layout, constructed by a secret program, is not a reasonable substitute for the program. joke So, if I put a picture of Tour Eiffel in my package, what are the DFSG requirements: 1- pack a full 1tons steel replica of T.E. with each set of Debian/Sarge disks (complete with a crew of 1000 actors that play tourists, with 500 cameras) ; 2- pack a toy model of T.E. with each set of Debian/Sarge disks ; 3- pack a whole set of blueprints of the T.E. , so that any body can build its own /joke :-) a. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
european data grid
hi I think that the following license is free (according to DFSG) http://eu-datagrid.web.cern.ch/eu-datagrid http://eu-datagrid.web.cern.ch/eu-datagrid/license.html/license.html http://eu-datagrid.web.cern.ch/eu-datagrid/license.html but I would like your opinion on that. a.
please comment on mplayer 1.0-pre-cvs
hi following the discussion started by Diego Biurrun [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have prepared a new packaging of 'mplayer' the files are in http://tonelli.sns.it/pub/mplayer/sarge I have tried my best to address all known issues: 1) the package contains the detailed Copyright made by Diego Biurrun 2) the package AFAIK does not contain CSS code or other code on which there is active patent enforcement (I have deleted all CSS related code from the tar ball; to read DVD, it uses libdvdread3.deb, as 'xine' does) please comment on that package, and report whether it may go into Debian a. ps: I apologize: this is 3rd posting.. our relay is down... I hope this other account works -- Andrea Mennucc E' un mondo difficile. Che vita intensa! (Tonino Carotone) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
please comment on mplayer 1.0-pre-cvs
hi following the discussion started by Diego Biurrun [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have prepared a new packaging of 'mplayer' the files are in http://tonelli.sns.it/pub/mplayer/sarge I have tried my best to address all known issues: 1) the package contains the detailed Copyright made by Diego Biurrun 2) the package AFAIK does not contain CSS code or other code on which there is active patent enforcement please comment on that package, and report whether it may go into Debian a. -- Andrea Mennucc one houndred and fifty - the chicken sings pgp6IWxfFuaVL.pgp Description: PGP signature
please comment on mplayer 1.0-pre-cvs
hi following the discussion started by Diego Biurrun [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have prepared a new packaging of 'mplayer' the files are in http://tonelli.sns.it/pub/mplayer/sarge I have tried my best to address all known issues: 1) the package contains the detailed Copyright made by Diego Biurrun 2) the package AFAIK does not contain CSS code or other code on which there is active patent enforcement please comment on that package, and report whether it may go into Debian a. ps: this is a reposting the first post did never show up in debian-legal -- Andrea Mennucc one houndred and fifty - the chicken sings pgpUHu79Wyc1B.pgp Description: PGP signature
mplayer
I have uploaded mplayer_1.0.cvs20030324-1 to incoming (this package has small differences wrt the package that I announced on Saturday) and I have put it into http://tonelli.sns.it/pub/mplayer/sarge comments: * following the discussion started by Diego Biurrun [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/debian-legal-200403/msg00235.html in debian-devel, I have prepared a new packaging of 'mplayer' (with code that comes from CVS) * the upstream tar.bz cannot be distributed by Debian, since it contains CSS code; so I am repackaging it * I have tried my best to address all known issues: - the package contains the detailed Copyright made by Diego Biurrun that documents the origin and copyright of all code - the package does not contain CSS code: I have delete it; 'mplayer' links to libdvdread3 (that is in Debian). AFAIK the package does not contain code on which there is active patent enforcement. - there is a script debian/cvs-changelog.sh that shows all changes done to files included in this source. This should comply with GPLv2 sec 2.a (in spirit if not in letter) For this reason, the source code contains CVS directories. And I hope it may satisfy Don Armstrong's concern about GPLv2 sec 2.a so, do we include mplayer in Debian ?:-) a. -- Andrea Mennucc one houndred and fifty - the chicken sings pgp2aouZ1Lpwy.pgp Description: PGP signature
Design Science License (in freevo)
hi d-legal, I am taking care of the (forthcoming) freevo packages. Some artwork is covered by the attached Design Science License. Is it fine to include that stuff in the package and upload? (I would say yes, but you may have a more informed opinion). a. DESIGN SCIENCE LICENSE TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION Copyright © 1999-2001 Michael Stutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Verbatim copying of this document is permitted, in any medium. 0. PREAMBLE. Copyright law gives certain exclusive rights to the author of a work, including the rights to copy, modify and distribute the work (the reproductive, adaptative, and distribution rights). The idea of copyleft is to willfully revoke the exclusivity of those rights under certain terms and conditions, so that anyone can copy and distribute the work or properly attributed derivative works, while all copies remain under the same terms and conditions as the original. The intent of this license is to be a general copyleft that can be applied to any kind of work that has protection under copyright. This license states those certain conditions under which a work published under its terms may be copied, distributed, and modified. Whereas design science is a strategy for the development of artifacts as a way to reform the environment (not people) and subsequently improve the universal standard of living, this Design Science License was written and deployed as a strategy for promoting the progress of science and art through reform of the environment. 1. DEFINITIONS. License shall mean this Design Science License. The License applies to any work which contains a notice placed by the work's copyright holder stating that it is published under the terms of this Design Science License. Work shall mean such an aforementioned work. The License also applies to the output of the Work, only if said output constitutes a derivative work of the licensed Work as defined by copyright law. Object Form shall mean an executable or performable form of the Work, being an embodiment of the Work in some tangible medium. Source Data shall mean the origin of the Object Form, being the entire, machine-readable, preferred form of the Work for copying and for human modification (usually the language, encoding or format in which composed or recorded by the Author); plus any accompanying files, scripts or other data necessary for installation, configuration or compilation of the Work. (Examples of Source Data include, but are not limited to, the following: if the Work is an image file composed and edited in PNG format, then the original PNG source file is the Source Data; if the Work is an MPEG 1.0 layer 3 digital audio recording made from a WAV format audio file recording of an analog source, then the original WAV file is the Source Data; if the Work was composed as an unformatted plaintext file, then that file is the Source Data; if the Work was composed in LaTeX, the LaTeX file(s) and any image files and/or custom macros necessary for compilation constitute the Source Data.) Author shall mean the copyright holder(s) of the Work. The individual licensees are referred to as you. 2. RIGHTS AND COPYRIGHT. The Work is copyrighted by the Author. All rights to the Work are reserved by the Author, except as specifically described below. This License describes the terms and conditions under which the Author permits you to copy, distribute and modify copies of the Work. In addition, you may refer to the Work, talk about it, and (as dictated by fair use) quote from it, just as you would any copyrighted material under copyright law. Your right to operate, perform, read or otherwise interpret and/or execute the Work is unrestricted; however, you do so at your own risk, because the Work comes WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY -- see Section 7 (NO WARRANTY) below. 3. COPYING AND DISTRIBUTION. Permission is granted to distribute, publish or otherwise present verbatim copies of the entire Source Data of the Work, in any medium, provided that full copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty, where applicable, is conspicuously published on all copies, and a copy of this License is distributed along with the Work. Permission is granted to distribute, publish or otherwise present copies of the Object Form of the Work, in any medium, under the terms for distribution of Source Data above and also provided that one of the following additional conditions are met: (a) The Source Data is included in the same distribution, distributed under the terms of this License; or (b) A written offer is included with the distribution, valid for at least three years or for as long as the distribution is in print (whichever is longer), with a publicly-accessible address (such as a URL on the Internet) where, for a charge not greater than transportation and media costs, anyone may receive a copy of the Source Data of the Work distributed according to the section above; or (c) A third party's written offer
Re: mplayer, the time has come
hi I have uploaded mplayer 1.0pre6a-3 It ships a correctly repackaged upstream source; it has a 'debian/rules get-orig-source' (as asked in debian-devel) that creates the .orig.tar.gz It should appear in http://qa.debian.org/~anibal/debian-NEW.html and in I will put a copy in http://tonelli.sns.it/pub/mplayer/sarge please comment a. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Netscape on Alpha?
hi I am not good at legal issues so I am cross posting this to debian-legal the problem: Debian Alpha is lacking a good browser the solution: there is a version of Netscape 4.7-4 that was compiled by Compaq for Tru64; this version is also distributed by RedHat for Alpha; some people have passed it thru alien and installed it, and it works; it would take me 20 minutes to upload it into Debian archives (unstable/non-free) the question: it contains some libraries by Compaq: can I upload it? The license follows. thanks. On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 01:11:01PM +0100, Kerstin Hoef-Emden wrote: Hi, On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Andrea Mennucc wrote: what about uploading that package to the debian archives, in non-free? Do the license of Compaq and the Debian policy allow this? Presumably a debian-maintainer with access-permission for uploads has to do this? The package is 16.6 MB large and this is the dpkg -I output: new debian package, version 2.0. size 16583190 bytes: control archive= 6444 bytes. 0 bytes, 0 lines conffiles 1582 bytes,38 lines control 15331 bytes, 197 lines md5sums 257 bytes, 8 lines * postinst #!/bin/sh 194 bytes, 6 lines * prerm#!/bin/sh Package: netscape Version: 4.7-4 Section: alien Priority: extra Architecture: alpha Installed-Size: 34054 Maintainer: Kerstin Hoef-Emden [EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: Netscape prebuilt for Alpha Linux The Alpha Tru64 Unix version of Netscape, which runs on Alpha Linux. Requires COFF support in the kernel. There may be problems running Java due to differences in the thread models between Tru64 Unix and Linux. This RPM embeds the instructions at http://www.alphalinux.org/docs/netscape_du.shtml. Includes some Compaq Tru64 Unix libraries. . Disclaimer of Warranty: . The products and product information furnished hereunder are furnished AS IS without warranty, service or support of any kind. You assume all risks as to the quality or performance of the products and responsibility for any costs associated with the service or support of the products. COMPAQ disclaims all implied warranties including, without limitation, all implied warranties of merchantability and fitness. . Limitation of Liability: . In no event will COMPAQ be liable for any damages whatsoever, including loss of data or use, lost profits, or any incidential or consequential damages arising out of or in connection with this agreement or the use or performance of the products, whether in an action of contract or tort including negligence. . %changes Repackaged to install files directly rather than by running a script to unpack a tar file. . Moved install directories from /usr/local/... to /usr/lib/... to match RedHat 6.1 for Intel. EOF--- ps: please someone send me a link to an URL from which I may download the .rpm and the .deb a. -- A Mennucc E' un mondo difficile. Che vita intensa! (Renato Carotone) pgpHo3Cp3vDRM.pgp Description: PGP signature
subscribe
subscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[no subject]
subscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
another mplayer .deb of 0.90rc3 release
hello to everybody here is another package of mplayer :-) (prepared for Debian testing) http://tonelli.sns.it/pub/mplayer Here is the history of our effort. --- In Sep 2001, Dariush filed an Intent to Package mplayer for Debian. I wished to sponsor. We decided (~1 year ago) to try to put together a package of mplayer that would be accepted into the mainstream Debian distribution. I had these priorities in mind: 0) package must comply with Debian Free Software Guideline (DFSG) and with Debian policy 1) package must be lintian clean (as much as possible) 2) package should be well designed: debconf configuration split documentation split gmplayer 3) package should offer some extras such as: automatic codec download flexible debian/rules that can be used by users for custom packages mencoder and other tools (and the general rule: keep it simple) BTW: we knew that Christian Marillat would not mantain an official Debian package. [http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200301/msg00815.html] Moreover, last time I looked into it, his packages contained some extra features (e.g. lame) that are not accepted in Debian. This was indeed discussed in the above thread. So, we read all the licenses and copyrights (Debian is very picky about it), we waited until mplayer had runtime CPU detetection, and until it had an opensource debugged DivX player; then we prepared a package, and we proposed it Debian in october. It was refused, since ftp-installer asked more clarifications on some licenses (there are files with strange copyrights, see libvo/vo_md5.c as an example). So we started again. We asked the authors some clarifications on licenses. Now we think that we have a package that suits 0 and 1; so I uploaded it into the incoming queue. We are waiting for ftp-installer to reply. Note that our package still needs some work on issues 2 and 3. In the meantime Robert Nagy has posted another ITP http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200301/msg00796.html I am currenty exchanging e-mails with him. I am trying to merge the best of the two packaging. --- Someone asked: Why bother? Because 'mplayer' is an hell of a wonderful program! With the help of the win32 codecs (that the script /usr/share/mplayer/scripts/win32codecs.sh will automatically download), it plays any kind of movie clip that I have ever downloaded from Internet (and I have a big collection), included Microsoft, Quicktime, Realplayer formats. --- So now I am asking if people can test our package. debian-legal: please read debian/README.Debian.2 in the source; do you think that it is/isn't fit to go into Debian? debian-devel: any comment/critics? --- btw: I stumbled into http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200301/msg01712.html I think that all issues are solved by now (AFAIK Arpi was asking not to distribute binaries before run-time-cpu-detection); but for point 4. So if people on debian-legal thinks that it is important, I will add a diff of libmpeg2. --- have fun a. -- Andrea Mennucc E' un mondo difficile. Che vita intensa! (Tonino Carotone)
Re: subscribe
subscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] sorry: yesterday evening I commented out the lines #on wakeup: # boot brain/0 I am now self-patching with the help of a java-cup a. -- Andrea Mennucc E' un mondo difficile. Che vita intensa! (Tonino Carotone)
Re: mplayer licenses
Adam Warner wrote: I'm please to see what has been done Andrea. I believe the copyright file can be improved by these completely unofficial suggestions (suggestions start with *): This package was first debianized by * TeLeNiEkO * [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Mon, 26 Feb 2001 12:24:04 +0100. Original source can be found at: http://www.mplayerHQ.hu/homepage/ Copyrighted by various authors. Licensed under the terms of GNU GPL. See /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL for details. * How is mplayer licensed under the terms of the GPL when I can't find a licence statement in the original distribution? (perhaps my grepping was incomplete). I thought it was odd that you didn't list the mplayer copyright holders in the above paragraph. Maybe the reason is you couldn't find them. The only reference to mplayer being licensed under the GPL in the original sources is that it contains a debian subdirectory containing the above comment. While I'm aware that mplayer can't be legally licensed under anything but the GPL (given the way the GPL is constructed) it would be nice if mplayer actually contained a LICENSE file or equivalent. mplayer is more than the sum of its parts. Thankfully I have located such a statement on the website: http://www.mplayerhq.hu/homepage/design6/info.html License MPlayer can be distributed under the GPL v2 license. Please amend the copyright file to refer to the GNU GPL version 2. And link to the website licence statement. Hopefully upstream will make this clearer in a future release. OK --- libvo/vo_pgm.c libvo/vo_md5.c * Copyright (C) 1996, MPEG Software Simulation Group. All Rights Reserved. ... WAL [2nd e-mail] OK. I looked again, but I could not find anything WAL from the MSSG reference decoder there. I think it's clean. AMS so the copyright is bogus. The Debian patches the above two AMS files to refer to this explanation. * These files now refer to a non-existing file: * (Mennucc1: the copyright was bogus. Read README.Debian.2) I'd suggest this rewrite: * (Mennucc1: MPEG Software Simulation Group copyright no longer applies as the reference decoder was rewritten. Refer /usr/share/doc/mplayer/copyright for details) OK ... * Please consider looking up and quoting this mail and patching xa_gsm.c with a comment that the code is distributed under the GPL. This info contradicts comments in the file that indicate it is permissively licensed (with a request to be informed about uses and bugs--it's only a request so it's DFSG-free). I will ask Gabucino there is still a (minor) unresolved issue (sorry if I am incorrect in the below part... I am no good at 'legal') during the flames in 2002-03 in debian-legal, it was pointed out that , since mplayer contains many GPL code from other GPL libraries, with heavy modifications, and since GPL asks that such modifications be in some ways declared, this shoul be done * The above makes you look unprofessional. Quote the relevant section of the GPL v2: 2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions: a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change. State that many of the files are missing changelogs. OK on the other hand, the mplayer docs and source usually references many many what? the copyright file is incomplete. CORRECTED ... so , I have just added a statement in README.Debian * Your distribution doesn't contain a README.Debian file! (note the capitalisation). * README.Debian (when renamed) renamed You refer to debian/changelog. The changelog states: * uploaded to Debian. The source code was scrutinized for licenses and copyrights. Read debian/changelog for a detailed discussion. The changelog tells one to read the changelog!. Can you also provide the path to the correct file when installed. corrected * Could you rewrite this paragraph in a way that is less disparaging of your fellow developers: ``I personally want to trust that a piece of code stating GPL or LGPL is indeed DFSG complaint; if mantainers were so paranoids as to NOT trust licenses in source files (and e.g. think that the code may come from a non-free project but was simply relabelled), then it would be humanly impossible to add code to Debian at all. And similarly for tracking any change to any code: this requirement would make it so hard to actually reuse the code, that it void the spirit of GPL, that is, have code, will share, everybody enjoys.'' I believe your point can be expressed in this sentence: I trust that code purporting to be the copyright of a
Re: MPlayer revisited
Andrew Suffield wrote: with a package where upstream are untrustworthy lying bastards. I have followed the history of mplayer vs Debian, and I saw many flames, but yet this line by Andrew Suffield is an all-time record why isnt it possible to have a civil discussion on this matter? this is sooo sad a. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
