[Mageia-dev] rehashing the faac issue

Tue Oct 2 10:20:59 CEST 2012

Guillaume Rousse a écrit :
+> Hello list.
+> 
+> The case of faac package has been discussed several times already:
+> https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1730
+> http://www.mail-archive.com/mageia-dev@mageia.org/msg08059.html
+> 
+> https://www.mageia.org/pipermail/mageia-dev/2012-June/016673.html
+> 
+> So far, the conclusion was than we had no perfect solution to handle the
+> case of a software being having both licensing and patents issue,
+> whereas usually software only suffer from one of these problems only,
+> and than creating a dedicated 4th repository was unreasonable. Hence the
+> removal of the package from the mirrors (but not from our svn...).
+> 
+> Given the importance of this package for several multimedia-related
+> software (it is a mandatory dependency for cinerella, for instance), I
+> think it's time to revisit this decision, and rather look for a
+> pragmatic solution rather than a merely bureaucratic one. So far, I
+> didn't see anything in the line of "we don't want to distribute it",
+> rather "we don't know how to do it"...
+> 
+> For me, the simplest solution is just to decide between non-free and
+> tainted repository where this piece of code fits better (or sucks less),
+> eventually document the exception somewhere on the wiki, and stop
+> getting blocked eternally by our own rules...
+
+Look at the closed bugs containing the word faac... there are other
+programs than cinerella
+
+Anyway Blogdrake repo proposes a faac rpm ...
+If we need a Third Party Repo we could ask them to provide rpms built
+with faac (the spec files are ready for this)
+look at bug 2833 to get the list of rpms that may be built with faac
+
+
+