Re: [Ring] Ring packages for Fedora (was: Are the Arch linux packages gone?)
Hello Maxim! Thanks for taking time! > Maxim Cournoyer hat am 2. Februar 2018 > um 19:04 geschrieben: > > > Hello! > > - Original Message - > > From: inderau...@arcor.de > > To: "Maxim Cournoyer" > > Cc: ring@gnu.org > > Sent: Friday, February 2, 2018 5:19:41 AM > > Subject: Re: Ring packages for Fedora (was: [Ring] Are the Arch linux > > packages gone?) > > > He Maxim, > > > > thanks for your reply and taking time! > > > > Related to RPM fusion: > > For me there seems to be the problem, that people already have to know about > > Ring. > > There is no chance to stumble and discover it through the categories of the > > AppCenter while searching for Apps they really need. > > Yes, we also would prefer to be available 'out of the box' on Fedora, so we > are interested in evaluating all options. That's pretty cool! > > > Related to the patents: > > 1. Why does Ring have to use FFMPEG at all? > > It's currently used for processing (decoding/encoding) video and audio > streams. It's a required dependency of Ring. > > > 2. Could https://pipewire.org/#about be an alternative? > > From a quick glance at the project, it seems PipeWire is about providing a > similar set of features as PulseAudio but for videos. It is not dealing with > the encoding/decoding of the streams directly itself but can be used with > GStreamer, which can do that with its various plugins. Hmm on their website they tell: " Features include: - Capture and playback of audio and video with minimal latency. - Real-time Multimedia processing on audio and video." -> Doesn't this include streaming? --> So probably it's about video and audio too! > > It might be possible to use GStreamer and a select choices of free and patent > unencumbered codecs, but I'd expect this to be a big effort (to adapt Ring > for it). -> What makes this a big effort? I am not into that technical things, so i just ask you directly ... > > It'd be useful to make a detailed analysis of GStreamer to see how it fares > against FFmpeg. This would be cool! When will you guys do this? Btw. thanks for working on Ring! > > Happy Friday! Happy weekend! Anna > > Maxim
Re: [Ring] Ring packages for Fedora (was: Are the Arch linux packages gone?)
Hello! - Original Message - > From: inderau...@arcor.de > To: "Maxim Cournoyer" > Cc: ring@gnu.org > Sent: Friday, February 2, 2018 5:19:41 AM > Subject: Re: Ring packages for Fedora (was: [Ring] Are the Arch linux > packages gone?) > He Maxim, > > thanks for your reply and taking time! > > Related to RPM fusion: > For me there seems to be the problem, that people already have to know about > Ring. > There is no chance to stumble and discover it through the categories of the > AppCenter while searching for Apps they really need. Yes, we also would prefer to be available 'out of the box' on Fedora, so we are interested in evaluating all options. > Related to the patents: > 1. Why does Ring have to use FFMPEG at all? It's currently used for processing (decoding/encoding) video and audio streams. It's a required dependency of Ring. > 2. Could https://pipewire.org/#about be an alternative? >From a quick glance at the project, it seems PipeWire is about providing a >similar set of features as PulseAudio but for videos. It is not dealing with >the encoding/decoding of the streams directly itself but can be used with >GStreamer, which can do that with its various plugins. It might be possible to use GStreamer and a select choices of free and patent unencumbered codecs, but I'd expect this to be a big effort (to adapt Ring for it). It'd be useful to make a detailed analysis of GStreamer to see how it fares against FFmpeg. Happy Friday! Maxim
Re: [Ring] Ring packages for Fedora (was: Are the Arch linux packages gone?)
He Maxim, thanks for your reply and taking time! Related to RPM fusion: For me there seems to be the problem, that people already have to know about Ring. There is no chance to stumble and discover it through the categories of the AppCenter while searching for Apps they really need. Related to the patents: 1. Why does Ring have to use FFMPEG at all? 2. Could https://pipewire.org/#about be an alternative? > Maxim Cournoyer hat am 1. Februar 2018 > um 20:53 geschrieben: > > > Hello, > > - Original Message - > > From: "Maxim Cournoyer" > > To: inderau...@arcor.de > > Cc: ring@gnu.org > > Sent: Thursday, February 1, 2018 1:52:20 PM > > Subject: Re: [Ring] Are the Arch linux packages gone? > > > - Original Message - > >> From: inderau...@arcor.de > >> To: ring@gnu.org > >> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 3:28:45 AM > >> Subject: Re: [Ring] Are the Arch linux packages gone? > > > >> see discussion here > >> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/ring/2017-11/msg00021.html > >> > >> > >>> inderau...@arcor.de hat am 31. Januar 2018 um 09:26 geschrieben: > >>> > >>> > >>> By the way: Here is what Fedora guys told me about integrating Ring > >>> packages > >>> into Gnome Software repositories. > >>> > >>> > >>> > > I'm interest in GNU Ring's communication solution. > >>> https://ring.cx/en > >>> > https://ring.cx/en/about/practical > >>> > > >>> > > > >>> > >>> > >>> "I see that FFMPEG is mentioned on Ring's website. FFMPEG isn't > >>> permissible in > >>> Fedora because the USA's patent system is crap, so it's packaged in > >>> RPM Fusion > >>> instead. Anyone who wants to package Ring will have to do it in RPM > >>> Fusion (or > >>> another add-on repository), unless Ring can function without FFMPEG. > >>> > > >> Björn Persson" > > Thanks for the information. Indeed, Fedora's packaging guidelines prevent > adding patent encumbered software[0]. FFmpeg implements tens of various > codecs, some of which are patent encumbered. As FFmpeg is a required > dependency of Ring (it is used to process the video and audio streams), it > also wouldn't be allowed to enter the main Fedora repositories. It could be > added to the opt-in RPM Fusion repository, as noted by Björn above. > > In the meantime, we provide our own repository for Fedora here: > https://ring.cx/en/download/gnu-linux. > > Thanks, > > Maxim > > [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Legal
Re: [Ring] Ring packages for Fedora (was: Are the Arch linux packages gone?)
Hello, - Original Message - > From: "Maxim Cournoyer" > To: inderau...@arcor.de > Cc: ring@gnu.org > Sent: Thursday, February 1, 2018 1:52:20 PM > Subject: Re: [Ring] Are the Arch linux packages gone? > - Original Message - >> From: inderau...@arcor.de >> To: ring@gnu.org >> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 3:28:45 AM >> Subject: Re: [Ring] Are the Arch linux packages gone? > >> see discussion here >> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/ring/2017-11/msg00021.html >> >> >>> inderau...@arcor.de hat am 31. Januar 2018 um 09:26 geschrieben: >>> >>> >>> By the way: Here is what Fedora guys told me about integrating Ring >>> packages >>> into Gnome Software repositories. >>> >>> >>> > > I'm interest in GNU Ring's communication solution. >>> https://ring.cx/en >>> > https://ring.cx/en/about/practical >>> > >>> > > >>> >>> >>> "I see that FFMPEG is mentioned on Ring's website. FFMPEG isn't >>> permissible in >>> Fedora because the USA's patent system is crap, so it's packaged in RPM >>> Fusion >>> instead. Anyone who wants to package Ring will have to do it in RPM >>> Fusion (or >>> another add-on repository), unless Ring can function without FFMPEG. >>> > >> Björn Persson" Thanks for the information. Indeed, Fedora's packaging guidelines prevent adding patent encumbered software[0]. FFmpeg implements tens of various codecs, some of which are patent encumbered. As FFmpeg is a required dependency of Ring (it is used to process the video and audio streams), it also wouldn't be allowed to enter the main Fedora repositories. It could be added to the opt-in RPM Fusion repository, as noted by Björn above. In the meantime, we provide our own repository for Fedora here: https://ring.cx/en/download/gnu-linux. Thanks, Maxim [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Legal
