September 2016 - rpmfusion-developers

[Bug 2736] Review Request: fdk-aac - Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2736 --- Comment #27 from Christopher Atherton <the8lack8ox(a)gmail.com> --- (In reply to Nicolas Chauvet from comment #23) > SPEC: http://rpms.kwizart.net/fedora/reviews/fdk-aac/fdk-aac.spec > SRPM: > http://rpms.kwizart.net/fedora/reviews/fdk-aac/fdk-aac-0.1.5-0.1.gita0bd8aa. > fc24.src.rpm > Summary: Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library > > Changes: > - Spec file clean-up > - Update to 1.5 github snapshot > > > This library is for the nonfree section. > > @Christopher , please create a fas account in fas.rpmfusion.org if not done > already, I will add you as a co-maintainer. Thx Signed up in fas.rpmfusion.org as: cjatherton Thanks! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

8 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 2736] Review Request: fdk-aac - Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2736 Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Blocks|2 |3 Assignee|rpmfusion-package-review@rp |sergio(a)serjux.com |mfusion.org | --- Comment #26 from Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com> --- fedora-review --other-bz https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org -b 2736 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64-rpmfusion_nonfree no issues , just not sure is documentation aacDecoder.pdf and aacEncoder.pdf should be in devel package , at least in -doc sub package ... Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: fdk-aac-debuginfo-0.1.5-0.1.gita0bd8aa.fc26.x86_64.rpm fdk-aac-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-license FDK-AAC 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- fdk-aac-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-license FDK-AAC fdk-aac-devel.x86_64: W: invalid-license FDK-AAC fdk-aac-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib fdk-aac.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Fraunhofer -> Fraudster fdk-aac.x86_64: W: invalid-license FDK-AAC 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. invalid license is not an problem, only-non-binary-in-usr-lib usr/lib have a symlink correctly and other warnings can be ignored. fdk-aac.spec looks good , source field could be more simple : https://github.com/mstorsjo/%{name}/archive/%{commit0}/%{name}-%{shortcom... So just need clarify documentation and I will approve it . Thanks -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

8 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 2736] Review Request: fdk-aac - Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2736 --- Comment #25 from Eric Work <work.eric(a)gmail.com> --- @Nicolas, Since I'm now using the Negativo17 ffmpeg package and actually using the native AAC encoder now I have less of a need for this package. I don't mind helping to maintain the package as new releases come out and do some testing. I don't know when I'd have time to do another review if that is also being asked. I don't mind either way being a co-maintainer or not. I'll try and help out when I can, but not going to feel hurt if not a co-maintainer :-) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

8 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 2736] Review Request: fdk-aac - Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2736 --- Comment #24 from Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com> --- @Eric, same for you if you want to co-maintain. Feel free to assign the review, I should have fixed your earlier comments, thx. About your last comment, fdk-aac is GPL incompatible (according to ffmpeg folk because of some additional restrictions added to the files headers to the LGPL). So it's illegal to enable the gpl flag (aka to enable x264/x265 and some others libraries) along with the --nonfree flag (required for cuda/fdk-aac/etc) and redistribute the same build. (it's perfectly fine for your own usage or if kept in the same organisation). Having it shared or builtin isn't relevant at all. If you redistribute such build, it will be a violation of the ffmpeg and others developers rights. Instead, we plan to redistribute a ffmpeg build with the gpl flag disabled. So this package will be redistributed as "L"GPL instead of GPL. This build can be redistributed even if we have activated few non-free dependencies. At least that the plan to be discussed in the coming ffmpeg-nonfree review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

8 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

AAC in RPM Fusion ?

by Nicolas Chauvet

2016-09-06 20:55 GMT+02:00 Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com>: ... XXX have others sources like openh264, vo-aacenc , fdk-aac, we > are going only discus libdvdcss ? or we may extend for other patents > problems . The AAC case is way less problematic because: - fdk-aac itslef can be allowed in the nonfree section (see rfbz#2736) - we 'could' (1) introduce a ffmpeg-nonfree to enable it, and as there are other "users" of that nonfree capability (such as cuda) that became relevant to maintain an alternate (binary only) ffmpeg built. vo-aacenc should be superseded by fdk-aac or ffmpeg internal AAC encoders with 3.x+, openh264 could be introduced in RPM Fusion free (we don't replace fedora package from the main repo), but then it would mean the fedora solution isn't suitable which I dislike. If one wants to enable h264 support (and in gst probably) better to have gstreamer1-libav (or ffmpeg-libs for firefox users). So openh264 is a false problem to me, we have way better libraries. So I don't see a fundamental design in our work-flow that wouldn't allow to have full featured capabilities in our packages collection. So I'm not much looking into theses downstream users that aren't contributing back to us. I think their attitude is selfish. Instead I'm more worried in our process, like peer package reviews and the package review queue along with allowing new maintainers to join. Having others sysadmin to step into infra tasks should be much more widespread with the new infra. (thx Ben Rosser for your work on rfpkg-minimal!) (1), I will submit a RR in a few. -- - Nicolas (kwizart)

8 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Bug 2736] Review Request: fdk-aac - Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2736 --- Comment #23 from Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com> --- SPEC: http://rpms.kwizart.net/fedora/reviews/fdk-aac/fdk-aac.spec SRPM: http://rpms.kwizart.net/fedora/reviews/fdk-aac/fdk-aac-0.1.5-0.1.gita0bd8... Summary: Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library Changes: - Spec file clean-up - Update to 1.5 github snapshot This library is for the nonfree section. @Christopher , please create a fas account in fas.rpmfusion.org if not done already, I will add you as a co-maintainer. Thx -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

8 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

Reverse weak dependencies in RPMFusion packages

by Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski

Dear RPMFusion contributors! In light of https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/61 and https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Workstation/Third_party_software_proposal should we start adding Supplements: or Enhances: weak dependencies to, say, ffmpeg and other packages? Regards, Dominik -- Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org "Faith manages." -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"

8 years, 3 months

5
7
0 / 0

[Bug 3999] Review request: xt7-player-mpv - Qt/Gambas gui to mpv media player

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3999 --- Comment #3 from MartinKG <mgansser(a)alice.de> --- Spec URL: https://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/xt7-player-mpv.spec SRPM URL: https://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/xt7-player-mpv-0.20.384-1.... %changelog * Thu Sep 01 2016 Martin Gansser <martinkg(a)fedoraproject.org> - 0.20.384-1 - Update to 0.20.384 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

8 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

ffmpeg for EL7

by Orion Poplawski

Does anyone here have any ffmpeg knowledge that would give a reason for preferring anything other than the current ffmpeg 3.1.1 for EL7? Does ffmpeg have a long-term-support branch? -- Orion Poplawski Technical Manager 303-415-9701 x222 NWRA, Boulder/CoRA Office FAX: 303-415-9702 3380 Mitchell Lane orion(a)nwra.com Boulder, CO 80301 http://www.nwra.com

8 years, 3 months

5
32
0 / 0

[Bug 4009] Review request: qmplay2 - A Qt based media player, streamer and downloader

by RPM Fusion Bugzilla

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4009 MartinKG <mgansser(a)alice.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |FIXED --- Comment #25 from MartinKG <mgansser(a)alice.de> --- The import and build have been done correctly. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

8 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

rpmfusion-developers September 2016