Lucas Bonnet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Richard Stallman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> You're wrong, EMMS is indeed a GNU project. >> >> It seems that EMMS is a GNU package--a separate one. >> I will look at the situation with EMMS and mplayer. > > What do you mean by "situation"? EMMS supports several command-line > players; by default they are, in this order : > - mpg321 > - ogg123 > - mplayer > > Which means that EMMS tries mpg321 (for mp3s), ogg123 (for ogg vorbis) > and then mplayer (for pretty much everything else). EMMS does not > recommend the use of mplayer. > > Does the simple fact of allowing users to use mplayer means "encouraging"?
No, I don't beleive that is what Richard or anyone else is arguing. I think there are two issues that Richard is concerned about. 1. Free software that actively encourages the use of non-free software/codecs etc. (I don't believe mplayer does this). 2. Free software which, through the way it is configured/setup implicitly encourages the use of non-free software. This one is possibly the more common and perhaps incidious of the two because people may not realise what they are doing. An example would be if mplayer had a button that allowed you to "easily" download and install non-free codecs by simply clicking on that button. I've not seen this, but I've not looked at mplayer very closely or even read its documentation. The fact a piece of free software allows you to use non-free software/codecs in itself is not an issue. Rather its the extent to which it facilitates doing so that is of concern. the FSF isn't so ideological as to try and ban the use of free software - if they were, you wouldn't have distributions like Red Hat or companies like Oracle doing a GNu Linux distribution and the ability to run non-free packages. Rather, they don't want to implicitly or explicitly encourage the use of non-free software and they want people to be aware they are using non-free softtware when they do. this original debate started when Richard asked that an elisp package not encourage the use of realplayer by promoting as one of its benefits that it provided an easy interface to that bit of non-free software. He didn't say it couldn't do that or in any way indicate that it was or should be barred from doing so. I suspect he would prefer that the package promoted itself as providing a convenient interface to other free software and left the fact that it could be used to interface to realplayer as an available option for those wanting it bad enough (assuming there isn't a free alternative of course). regards, Tim -- tcross (at) rapttech dot com dot au _______________________________________________ gnu-emacs-sources mailing list gnu-emacs-sources@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-emacs-sources