Re: PLEASE READ: Import status livna, work from maintainers required

On 21.08.2008 18:43, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: >On Monday, 11 August 2008 at 07:01, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >>About the other package. I'm not going to touch that package ever in RPM >>Fusion and I more and more agree with those people that asked not to >>ship it. So IOW: Somebody else needs to branch, import, build and sign >>that package. >I don't know if you read my reply on IRC, but strictly speaking, you >have already done that by branching, importing and signing MPlayer >builds. MPlayer contains a copy of libdvdcss. I know, but the source here in Germany is not the problem afaik; OTHO distributing an binary app or lib that is directly able to circumvent css is afaik.

> [...] >>Can't remember, but I think so; it iirc uses the package in question >>dynamically if needed. >Indeed, but users still need to get that package from somewhere. And I'd say that "somewhere" is the better place (¹) as having a compiled libdvdcss in the repos in my humble opinion might be problematic for these reasons: * we already lost one major long-term Fedora and Livna contributor from Europe because he feared to contribute to a repo that might contain libdvdcss. * There are likely a lot more Fedora contributors that won't contribute to RPM Fusion (livna showed that in the past) as long as there is a package like libdvdcss in the repos, as libdvdcss is one level more problematic that all the other stuff we have. * I hope that we in the long term can cooperate with proprietary software companies to get their software (things like flash, adobe reader and similar stuff) into our nonfree repo; that will liekly never work if we have libdvdcss in the repo * it could create trouble for people mirroring or using RPM Fusion; thus some people will decide not to mirror or use RPM Fusion