> Why don't you name it to a name actually saying what it means:
There are other places where software patents are legal, eg Japan IIRC.
http://aurelien.bompard.org ~~~~ Jabber : abompard(a)jabber.fr
This mail is displayed with recycled electrons
FYI: there was a new package reviewed for Livna which contains bits that
are not acceptable for Fedora. During review it had the name-postifx
Several people never liked the term, as the bits in this and similar
cases are actually free, just not acceptable for Fedora due to US laws.
So there was a discussion to chose a different name. We quick settled on
the term "freeworld". If that name is okay for everybody else I'd
suggest we use it from now on and change all other "nonfree OSS"
packages (audacious-plugins-nonfree, xine-lib-extras-nonfree,
kde-multimedia-nonfree, ...) to that name before or during the move to
RPM Fusion. Does that sound like a plan?
For details see:
Summary: Review request: autopano-sift-C - SIFT feature detection
Product: Package Reviews
Component: Review Request
Estimated Hours: 0.0
Spec URL: http://bugbear.blackfish.org.uk/~bruno/apt/SPECS/autopano-sift-C.spec
This package provides an implementation of the SIFT algorithm and a set of
utilities to utilize the algorithm to match two or more images. The output is
created as project file for the hugin panorama stitching software.
Note0: This is an SVN snapshot as there have been no tarball releases.
Note1: This isn't in fedora because SIFT is patented in the US.
Note2: This is a C port of 'autopano-sift' (which is a mono app).
Note3: autopano-sift is on the rpmfusion wishlist.
Note4: builds in mock for x86_64 and i386.
Note5: rpmlint reports no errors or warnings.
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
Tanguy Eric wrote:
> Hi, this soft make what i hate : integrate another project. Mediatomb
> integrate in the tarball a quite old version of libupnp (1.6.1) which is
> BSD license (http://pupnp.sourceforge.net/). Fedora have libupnp 1.6.2
> in stable and 1.6.3 is pending.
> I hope this package will not interfere with fedora libupnp.
> There is also libdlna (http://libdlna.geexbox.org/) which is an
> extension of libupnp. Libdlna is patent encumbred because it uses ffmpeg
> and is now part of livna.
> In conclusion, Mediatomb uses pupnp software which is patent free but it
> duplicates software ...
Thanks for your reply, can you please add your comment about Mediatomb using
its own private copy of libupnp to:
Then the packager should patch is so that it will use the system version instead,
> Eric Tanguy
> Le mercredi 02 janvier 2008 à 12:28 +0100, Hans de Goede a écrit :
>> I know that there has been some work done recently on some upnp packages for
>> livna as there were some patent issues, today I stumbled over this review in
>> Can someone who knows a bit more check wether this piece of upnp software is
>> patent stuff free?
>> Freeworld mailing list: Freeworld(a)livna.org
> Freeworld mailing list: Freeworld(a)livna.org
I know that there has been some work done recently on some upnp packages for
livna as there were some patent issues, today I stumbled over this review in
Can someone who knows a bit more check wether this piece of upnp software is
patent stuff free?