Re: qtractor moved to Fedora

2012/5/23 Brendan Jones&lt;brendan.jones.it(a)gmail.com&gt;: > On 05/21/2012 09:50 AM, Nicolas Chauvet wrote: >> >> Le 20 mai 2012 23:24, "Kevin Kofler&quot;&lt;kevin.kofler(a)chello.at >> <mailto:kevin.kofler@chello.at>> a écrit : >> >> >> Nicolas Chauvet wrote: >> > But in this case I wonder why not to simply override the no >> > replacement policy ? At least a good reason would need to be >> provided >> > for still obeying this policy. >> >> Users in countries which obey software patents might not want their >> patent- >> compliant package silently replaced by a patent-encumbered one. >> >> It doens't hold, RPM Fusion free is fully made of patent encumbered >> components by design. >> Which make me wonder if we really need to requires the >> rpmfusion-free-release from the rpmfusion-nonfree-release from patent >> point of view. >> >> My point is that people using mp3 enabled qtractor from current RPM >> Fusion shouldn't received a disabled package either. >> >> Nicolas (kwizart) > > > I completely understand your concern here. > > Orcan has indicated that he was looking to find a new maintainer for > qtractor in any case. I'm more than happy to maintain both and personally > deal with the fallout. I think in Fedora renaming this anything other than > the 'qtractor' is unlikely. I'm happy to consider the alternatives option Ok so please at least consider submitting non-conflicting package. Have a look on OpenEXR_Viewer-nonfree for a sample about using alternatives. Nicolas (kwizart)