Hi Reinhard, On 06.06.2015 20:30, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 1:51 PM, Bálint Réczey <bal...@balintreczey.hu> wrote: >>> The problem is that Debian users must be allowed to redistribute it, >>> but as far as I understand it, it is not allowed to distribute e.g. >>> a live DVD with hedgewars and libavcodec-extra installed. >>> I also pointed this out in the previous discussion [1]. >> I'm not absolutely sure, but IMO yes, such Live DVD-s would not be >> allowed, but it is a problem of live DVD makers to care about. Package >> maintainers can't and should not prevent this usage. > > Why would you think that distributing the packages libavcodec-extra > and hedgewars on the same Live media would create a derived work that > must fulfill all licenses? > > I fail to spot the problem here.
The problem I see is run-time linking a GPLv2-only program with a GPLv3+ library. I think this makes such a Live DVD undistributable, because the licenses are not compatible. > If you want to be extra careful, just install the regular GPLv2+ > libavcodec package, which according to the dependencies of the > hedgewars package should work just fine. This wouldn't work if you also want to install devede, which depends on libavcodec-extra. (This dependency should probably be a recommends at most, anyway.) >>>> Since the hassle makes more work for active ffmpeg maintainers and >>>> while I sponsored a few uploads I don't consider myself one I should >>>> not make the call, but it would be really nice to provide the AMR >>>> encoder as well in Debian and also keeping hedgewars in the archive. >>>> >>>> Maybe there is a way of providing libavcodec-extra and having modern >>>> packaging scripts. Maybe patching the build could help, but I have not >>>> checked this idea. >>> >>> The AMR encoder is anyway just a wrapper around libopencore/libvo. >>> Gstreamer also has similar wrappers and since they are plugins, the >>> license is less of a problem. >>> Thus anyone really wanting to encode AMR can use gstreamer. > > Except those that want or need to use the "avconv" or "ffmpeg" > command-line utilities. How many would that be? >> I'm OK with disabling AMR encoder in ffmpeg and stay GPLv2 compatible >> with the packages since I have no packages requiring it nor use-cases >> as a user requiring it, but I prefer the choice provided by by current >> libav packaging. > > Thanks for the support! > >> Would it be hard to patch the build system? > > To do what exactly? To implement this in a dh7-style debian/rules file. > The current libav packaging already implements > this in a way that the user can choose what packages to install. > > On a personal note: The libav packaging can surely be improved and > simplified. But throwing away years of work just because, and knowing > about the regressions for the sake of simplicity feels wrong. The main modernization would be a rewrite of the debian/rules file in dh7-style. This naturally replaces the previous one. The rest of the packaging is mainly declarative and can't be varied that much anyway. Not having the libavcodec-extra flavor is not only a regression (having no AMR encoder), but also an improvement (simpler debian/rules, no license incompatibility to worry about, faster build, ...). I happen to think the improvement factor is bigger than the regression factor, but others may disagree. Best regards, Andreas _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers