[Mageia-dev] Gstreamer pfl codecs/plugins

Thu Mar 24 14:58:30 CET 2011

+
+Quote: rdalverny wrote on Thu, 24 March 2011 14:45
+----------------------------------------------------
+> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 14:39, Frank Griffin <ftg at roadrunner.com>
+> wrote:
+> > On 03/24/2011 05:14 AM, Tux99 wrote:
+> >>
+> >> Can you (or anyone) tell us when the build system will be ready to
+> deal
+> >> with source packages that generate both core and tainted binary
+> packages?
+> >>
+> >> Is it something that's still far off (months) or will this be
+> possible
+> >> soon?
+> >
+> > On a related issue, the wiki still states that we're not quite sure
+> > what
+> > will be in "tainted".  Is this supposed to be a complete
+> > replacement for PLF
+> > Mandriva, or will there be a need for a PLF Mageia as well ?
+> 
+>
+> http://mageia.org/wiki/doku.php?id=licensing_policy#acceptable_licenses
+> 
+> "The tainted section accepts software under a license that is might be
+> free or open source and which cannot be redistributed publicly in
+> certain areas in the world, or due to patents issues."
+> 
+> and
+> 
+> http://mageia.org/wiki/doku.php?id=mirrors_policy#tainted
+> 
+> "stuff we think we can redistribute, but that may have some patent
+> issues or other restrictions in other countries"
+> 
+> look like consistent with each other, althought the "what belongs / is
+> allowed here must still be discussed" indeed looks like it's not
+> frozen yet.
+
+Actually I never noticed the second definition before, but the two
+definitions are certainly not consistent with each other, the second
+definition includes 'non-free' tainted software too since it only says
+that "we can redistribute" (non-free sw. is redistributable otherwise we
+can't have it in any repo at all).
+
+If the second definition is the valid one (I would prefer this one) then
+the whole recent thread about where to put "tainted+non-free" packages was
+moot, since it can go it "tainted".
+
+-- 
+Mageia ML Forum Gateway: http://mageia.linuxtech.net/forum/
+