Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I guess this attitude is what RMS has a problem with. > He's saying we should boycott mplayer until they start > caring about software freedom. > > Is that right, Richard? > > My position is a little stronger than that. As long as mplayer > recommends non-free codecs, we should not support mplayer.
Okay. That's quite simple. When the mplayer website stops reading, ``For a complete MPlayer installation you will need [...] a set of binary codecs,'' --- that is, when they stop recommending use of non-free codecs, --- then we can add support for MPlayer to Bongo. Since we already have MPlayer support in Bongo, we will have to announce its removal on the web site. I can do this. I'll say that we have decided to stop supporting MPlayer because it recommends non-free codecs, and mention that we still support VLC. Then I will begin working on a GStreamer backend. :-) > On the other hand, I believe --- and please correct me if I > am wrong --- that VLC in fact does not encourage use of > non-free software. Why don't they brag about this more? > > I do not know, but I speculate that they are supporters of the open > source philosophy rather than the free software philosophy. The idea > of open source is that you should aim only for making software > powerful and reliable. That world view does not suggest that freedom > is worth fighting for. Why, then, do they not recommend the non-free codecs that would make VLC more powerful? (Perhaps, I guess, because including binary-only code would make VLC less reliable.) -- Daniel Brockman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ bongo-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bongo-devel
