10:32 p.m.
Hi,
In RPMFusion, we have two repos - free and non-free and from a end user
perspective, they are very very likely to want both these repositories.
Instead of having to install two separate release packages to get what
they want, can we generate a sub package, say rpmfusion-release-all that
covers both these repositories? If we build such a release package
within Livna, maybe we can enable all three together. The split is
useful for some people but it shouldn't be exposed as much as now.
Rahul
12:38 p.m.
Hi,
On Saturday, 15 May 2010 at 00:32, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi,
In RPMFusion, we have two repos - free and non-free and from a end user
perspective, they are very very likely to want both these repositories.
Instead of having to install two separate release packages to get what
they want, can we generate a sub package, say rpmfusion-release-all that
covers both these repositories?
Simpler: a metapackage that requires both -free and -nonfree.
If we build such a release package within Livna, maybe we can enable
all
three together.
There's no Livna for recent Fedora releases. Which means there's no easy
way for end-users to get libdvdcss in F-12, for example.
The split is
useful for some people but it shouldn't be exposed as much as now.
I don't care much, but I'm not opposed to the change I'm suggesting.
Regards,
R.
--
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org | MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
12:45 p.m.
On 05/16/2010 06:08 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
Hi,
On Saturday, 15 May 2010 at 00:32, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In RPMFusion, we have two repos - free and non-free and from a end user
> perspective, they are very very likely to want both these repositories.
> Instead of having to install two separate release packages to get what
> they want, can we generate a sub package, say rpmfusion-release-all that
> covers both these repositories?
>
Simpler: a metapackage that requires both -free and -nonfree.
Wouldn't the user still be required to download and install two more
packages? The idea of a single package with both the repositories is to
make things simpler.
> If we build such a release package within Livna, maybe we can
enable all
> three together.
>
There's no Livna for recent Fedora releases. Which means there's no easy
way for end-users to get libdvdcss in F-12, for example.
Are there any active contributors who oppose adding libdvdcss to RPM
Fusion directly at this point?
Rahul
1:01 p.m.
* Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski [16/05/2010 14:57] :
There's no Livna for recent Fedora releases. Which means there's no easy
way for end-users to get libdvdcss in F-12, for example.
???
http://rpm.livna.org/repo/12/
http://rpm.livna.org/repo/13/
Emmanuel
1:11 p.m.
On Sunday, 16 May 2010 at 15:01, Emmanuel Seyman wrote:
* Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski [16/05/2010 14:57] :
>
> There's no Livna for recent Fedora releases. Which means there's no easy
> way for end-users to get libdvdcss in F-12, for example.
???
http://rpm.livna.org/repo/12/
http://rpm.livna.org/repo/13/
Strange, I'd swear it wasn't there when I was upgrading my laptop to F-12.
Never mind then, sorry for the noise.
Regards,
R.
--
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org | MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"
1:01 p.m.
On 16.05.2010 14:38, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Saturday, 15 May 2010 at 00:32, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> If we build such a release package within Livna, maybe we can enable all
> three together.
There's no Livna for recent Fedora releases. Which means there's no easy
way for end-users to get libdvdcss in F-12, for example.
I haven't tried myself, but multiple people told me livna still works
fine for F12 and F13.
Cu
knurd
1:15 p.m.
On 15.05.2010 00:32, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
In RPMFusion, we have two repos - free and non-free and from a end
user
perspective, they are very very likely to want both these repositories.
Instead of having to install two separate release packages to get what
they want, can we generate a sub package, say rpmfusion-release-all that
covers both these repositories? If we build such a release package
within Livna, maybe we can enable all three together. The split is
useful for some people but it shouldn't be exposed as much as now.
I tend to thinks that the wrong direction in the long term, as that
still doesn't solve problems like "where do I get the flash-plugin" for
new users.
I haven't thought this to the end, but maybe a small app that does
everything needed would be the better solution. E.g. the app could ask
"do you want nonfree software <yes/no>" "do you want to install the
flash-plugin <yes/no>" and things like that.
Yes, there are such small apps already. Last time I looked closer at
them they did some things in a ugly or non-ideal way that often lead to
problems sooner or later. But maybe we could talk to the author of one
of those to clean one up and make it the official, RPM Fusion endorsed
way to configure RPM Fusion and all the other stuff that a lot of people
want.
Cu
knurd
1:21 p.m.
On 05/16/2010 06:45 PM, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
I tend to thinks that the wrong direction in the long term, as that
still doesn't solve problems like "where do I get the flash-plugin" for
new users.
I don't see that. If you agree that a single release package to install
makes RPM Fusion more accessible then it is well worth the effort. If
Flash is distributable, it can be packaged as well. Even if that is not
the case, everything that we can do to improve usability is a step
forward. Don't let perfect stop the good.
I haven't thought this to the end, but maybe a small app that
does
everything needed would be the better solution. E.g. the app could ask
"do you want nonfree software <yes/no>" "do you want to install the
flash-plugin <yes/no>" and things like that.
Yes, there are such small apps already. Last time I looked closer at
them they did some things in a ugly or non-ideal way that often lead to
problems sooner or later. But maybe we could talk to the author of one
of those to clean one up and make it the official, RPM Fusion endorsed
way to configure RPM Fusion and all the other stuff that a lot of people
want.
Someone submitted such a app for review and due to opposition were made
to drop some of the non-free enablers making such an app not suitable
for what you are talking about.
Rahul
5304
days inactive
5306
days old
rpmfusion-developers@lists.rpmfusion.org
7 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski -
Emmanuel Seyman -
Rahul Sundaram -
Thorsten Leemhuis