[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: ubuntu-devel
Subject: Patent VS license restricted software
From: bdrung () debian ! org (Benjamin Drung)
Date: 2012-10-24 22:47:53
Message-ID: 1351118873.20930.23.camel () deep-thought
[Download RAW message or body]
Hi,
Should we discuss the following topic in an UDS session?
Current situation
=================
We have ubuntu-restricted-addons and ubuntu-restricted-extras in the
archive. They depend on packages that are either non-free [1] or could
be covered by patents (or both).
ubuntu-restricted-addons pulls in:
* flashplugin-installer (multiverse)
* gstreamer0.10-fluendo-mp3 (universe)
* gstreamer0.10-ffmpeg (universe)
* gstreamer0.10-plugins-bad (universe)
* gstreamer0.10-plugins-ugly (universe)
ubuntu-restricted-extras pulls in:
* ubuntu-restricted-addons (multiverse)
* gstreamer0.10-plugins-bad-multiverse (multiverse)
* libavcodec-extra-53 (universe)
* unrar (multiverse)
* ttf-mscorefonts-installer (multiverse)
Changes to discuss
==================
* Should we rearrange the restricted packages: One to depend only on
universe packages (patent restricted) and one only on multiverse
(license restricted)?
* Should we replace unrar by unar? Should we install unar by default?
* Should we install the universe packages by default? Should the user
have an opt-out chance at install time?
[1] non-free = not comply with the DFSG
--
Benjamin Drung
Debian & Ubuntu Developer
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic