http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=247 Orcan Ogetbil <orcanbahri(a)yahoo.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |orcanbahri(a)yahoo.com --- Comment #1 from Orcan Ogetbil <orcanbahri(a)yahoo.com&gt; 2008-12-12 21:18:50 --- Sent an email to upstream for permission about the distribution of MAC. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=247 --- Comment #3 from Orcan Ogetbil <orcanbahri(a)yahoo.com&gt; 2008-12-13 08:31:03 --- * I'm attaching the email I received from the author. We should probably put it in %doc's of all packages. * Also the file src/Readme.htm looks like it should be in the devel package. I'd say let's include copies of all src/*.txt and src/*.htm files in the %doc's of all packages. That will include the license file. * Do we need to ship the COPYING file? Please check its content. * rpmlint says: mac-libs.x86_64: W: executable-stack /usr/lib64/libmac.so.2.0.0 Is this because of yasm and is it harmless? mac-libs.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided mac Is this for freshrpms compatibility? * The main package shouldn't be "System Environment/Libraries". It should probably be "Applications/Multimedia" -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=247 --- Comment #5 from NicolasChauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com&gt; 2009-02-02 11:25:50 --- I still think mac is nonfree according to the license. If the author would be kind enought to pick a license from this list it could even allow us to have mac in Fedora. (as I don't think mac itself have something related to patent, Does it) http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#SoftwareLicenses SPEC: http://rpms.kwizart.net/fedora/reviews/mac/mac.spec SRPMS: http://rpms.kwizart.net/fedora/reviews/mac/mac-3.99-4.u4b5.fc10.src.rpm Summary: Monkey's Audio Codec (MAC) utility and library Changelog - Fix the main package category - Fix the execstack on libmac.so.2 - Move some docs from main to -devel -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=247 --- Comment #7 from NicolasChauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com&gt; 2009-02-02 18:18:37 --- (In reply to comment #6) If we think the redistribution is a problem, then We will have to wait for the license to be added to the source package itsef. As having the text that allow the redistribution not taken from the source package is completely irrelevant (specially as the mail comes from an untrusted source not even gpg signed). Here are some example of package that was waiting for such addition, even if the license was attached to the bugzilla. This was the case in the Ralink firmware reviews here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=230164 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=230161 If you have found any package that doesn't have the text to allow for redistribution added to the source package itself, please warn FE-LEGAL as this package shouldn't have been added to the repository. Why Not ? What is explained here is that License was not LGPL despite written as such in the day it was provided from sourceforge. It explains something very important, there was never a LGPL version of this mac source code. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=247 Orcan Ogetbil <oget.fedora(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #55 is|0 |1 obsolete| | --- Comment #9 from Orcan Ogetbil <oget.fedora(a)gmail.com&gt; 2009-02-02 20:09:51 --- Created an attachment (id=88) --> (http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/attachment.cgi?id=88) permission to redistribute -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=247 --- Comment #11 from NicolasChauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com&gt; 2009-02-23 18:10:06 --- On my side, I think that a permission to redistribute cannot be shipped in the package itself... We need to keep it in this bugreport or/and in the cvs. Redistribution agreement cannot "go along" the package distribution, doesn't it ? For an example, if we want to create an addition media with the rpmfusion-nonfree content. Is it possible for someone to pick this iso media (let's assume that we "rpmfusion" have made it) and sell it to cover burning and shipping fees?! -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=247 --- Comment #13 from Orcan Ogetbil <oget.fedora(a)gmail.com&gt; 2009-02-24 01:59:22 --- In addition to comment #12: (In reply to comment #11) No, they can't make such media, because they don't have the permission to redistribute. Only rpmfusion has this permission. I do think that we must make this clear inside the package. What is so wrong with indicating that we (rpmfusion) have the permission to redistribute? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=247 --- Comment #15 from Orcan Ogetbil <oget.fedora(a)gmail.com&gt; 2009-03-13 15:30:33 --- * %ifarch i686 x86_64 BuildRequires: yasm %endif Shouldn't we add i586 ? * %description says: "Permission to redistribute is granted by the AUTHOR to rpmfusion.org only. See mac-permission_to_redistribute.txt" But mac-permission_to_redistribute.txt is not included in the final binary RPM. * Package fails to build in rawhide: g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../src/Shared -I../../src/Shared -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_\ SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic -MT APEInfo.lo \ -MD -MP -MF .deps/APEInfo.Tpo -c APEInfo.cpp -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/APEInfo.o APELink.cpp: In member function 'void CAPELink::ParseData(const char*, const str_utf16*)': APELink.cpp:66: error: invalid conversion from 'const char*' to 'char*' APELink.cpp:67: error: invalid conversion from 'const char*' to 'char*' APELink.cpp:68: error: invalid conversion from 'const char*' to 'char*' APELink.cpp:69: error: invalid conversion from 'const char*' to 'char*' make[3]: *** [APELink.lo] Error 1 * Finally, one can just install the package "mac-libs", without installing the packages "mac" and "mac-devel". But then he/she will not see the license text of the package because the license file is not in the "mac-libs" package. Shall we include the src/License.htm file and mac-permission_to_redistribute.txt in the mac-libs package? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=247 --- Comment #17 from NicolasChauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com&gt; 2009-03-13 16:43:20 --- patch sent upstream -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=247 --- Comment #19 from Orcan Ogetbil <oget.fedora(a)gmail.com&gt; 2009-03-13 16:57:03 --- Created an attachment (id=119) --> (http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/attachment.cgi?id=119) fixes compilation warnings -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=247 Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on|33 | --- Comment #21 from Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info&gt; 2009-03-13 19:54:44 --- (In reply to comment #20) done -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.