PLEASE READ: Import status livna, work from maintainers required

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

On 01.09.2008 14:48, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> 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

Seems six weeks ago when I wrote this mail I forgot one important piece:

- having libdvdcvs in one of our repos could lead to projects or 
cooperation's not to mention or link to us. That's not limited to Fedora 
or Red Hat (see the mail from rpmfusion-users I just replied to); also 
some journalists and howto-writers will also chose to *not* mention RPM 
Fusion and thus not link to us

---

As you'll notice, my options regarding libdvdcss did not change.

If we ship libdvdcss in one of our repos we will ship a package that is 
way more bad (read as: known to be illegal not only in the US, but also 
in more than a few other country's) than all the other packages we have; 
that's creates more trouble for users, contributors and thus RPM Fusion 
than it solves.

Thus I'm still all for leaving libdvdcss out; livna, freshrpms or a 
brand new, small repo dedicated to just libdvdcss could ship it. Heck it 
IMHO shouldn't hurt us much if we help users to get it from there 
magically/automatically as long as libdvdcss is not directly in our repos.

CU
knurd