Re: the libdvdcss issue
Hi!
I thought we have sorted that out. Do we really have to go through this
discussion again?
Just ignore that issue. We should satisfy the majority's needs,
and
the majority of Fedora users (obviously) needs DVD playback (as well
as other patents/crypto stuff). If that guy(s) stops contributing -
that's not a problem at all. We easily find someone who will
contribute instead.
It's not just about contributors. It's also about bloggers, wikis and
press. In a lot of countries it would not be allowed to link to RPMfusion
(or probably even mention its name) if RPMfusion offers software to
circumvent copy protection.
I will not repeat here what I said my last posting. Please feel free to
find it in the archive and read it.
The bottom line is: RPMfusion will not just lose some contributors, but
will lose a lot of free advertisement and public attention. Is this price
really worth to keep one single RPM package with no dependencies, that can
be easily installed with a one-liner from somewhere else?
For me it means that if RPMfusion is offering software that is illegal in
Germany, I will stop blogging about it in fedorablog.de and remove the
package lists from repowatch.fedorablog.de. You can blame me for being a
sissy, but I see no other option for me.
I am tired about this discussion. It cannot be that first we find
something that seemed like a consensus against libdvdcss, and then
suddenly voices appear again pro libdvdcss, and the discussion starts all
over again.
To the people who are responsible for RPMfusion: Please make up your mind,
and then make an official and irrevocable (!) commitment pro or contra
libdvdcss.
Even a commitment pro libdvdcss would be better than this state of
insecurity we currently have, IMHO.
Regards
--
Richard "Shred" Körber