<p></p>
<div class="gmail_quote">Le 20 mai 2012 23:24, "Kevin Kofler" <<a href="mailto:kevin.kofler@chello.at" target="_blank">kevin.kofler@chello.at</a>> a écrit :<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Nicolas Chauvet wrote:<br>
> But in this case I wonder why not to simply override the no<br>
> replacement policy ? At least a good reason would need to be provided<br>
> for still obeying this policy.<br>
<br>
Users in countries which obey software patents might not want their patent-<br>
compliant package silently replaced by a patent-encumbered one.<br></blockquote><div>It doens't hold, RPM Fusion free is fully made of patent encumbered components by design.<br>Which make me wonder if we really need to requires the rpmfusion-free-release from the rpmfusion-nonfree-release from patent point of view.<br>
<br>My point is that people using mp3 enabled qtractor from current RPM Fusion shouldn't received a disabled package either.<br><br>Nicolas (kwizart) <br></div></div>