2008/5/5 Hans de Goede <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > KH KH wrote: > > > 2008/5/5 Hans de Goede <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > Xavier Lamien wrote: > > > > > > 2008/5/4 Ian Chapman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > > > Just a quick note to those who it concerns that Dribble is now > > > > > frozen > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > no new updates or packages will be permitted there. Most > > > > > contributors > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > migrating their packages to RPM Fusion, including most of mine. > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > very > > > > > > > much and I wish RPM Fusion the best of luck. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot Ian, > > > > > > > > I think dribble will be the first to merge in next couple of days, > > > > as we > > > > have a clean frozen version of packages set. > > > > > > > > Hans give a signal for cvssync. > > > > > > > > > > > > Xavier, > > > > > > We (Dribble) don't have a CVS, given the low package count and churn > > > we've > > > always been passing Ian srpms to build. > > > > > > So in order to get dribble's packages into rpmfusion cvs / look a > > > side, > > > someone would need to go to: > > > http://dribble.org.uk/listrpms4.html > > > > > > Create cvs modules for all srpms listed there and then use cvs-import > > > on > > > the srpms linked from there to populate the cvs modules. > > > > > > Owners for the modules can be found here: > > > http://rpmfusion.org/InitialPackageMerge > > > > > > But I guess all owners first need to have a FAS account, so maybe now > > > would > > > be a good moment to send a mail to the list asking everyone to create > > > a FAS > > > account? > > > > > > Hmm, I just realized that creating cvs modules isn't that easy > > > because we > > > first need to decide on a package for package base wether it goes to > > > non-free or free. > > > > > > So what are the rules for free? I would like to suggest the > > > following: > > > > > > "free: anything of which all components are under a license which is > > > listed > > > as > > > good on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing > > > > > > Notice that free fully follows this webpage except that chapter 6 > > > "Software > > > Types" is ignored. > > > > > > Notice that anything depending upon anything in non-free must be in > > > non-free > > > itself." > > > > > > Can everyone live with this? If we can agree this is the rule for the > > > non-free free split, then I can make a list of which packages in > > > dribble > > > should go where. > > > > > > > Hi ! > > I agree from this. I just want to notice that "-nonfree" expects at > > least the package to be redistributable. > > > > Agree, rules for non-free: > "non-free: the package must be redistributable" > > I don't expect dribble have such packages. But amr{nb,wb} codecs are > > ( altought opensource - we even cannot retristribute the sources). > > For such cases i guess it would be desirable to have nosrc.rpm in the > > SRPMS non-free section. > > > > But how would those then get build? I would prefer normal src.rpm's, which > then do a wget of the sources during the build, so the .src.rpm will most > likely only contain an .spec file, .nosrc.rpm's where the pieces have to be > pieced together manually before building, are no good, as we want all > packages to be automatically buildable from cvs + lookaside by plague.
+1 > > > Also all packages that can go to Fedora shouldn't be allowed in RPM > > Fusion. > > ( I have submitted some perl package freshrpms use for dvdrip at least) > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444733 > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444744 > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444745 > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444755 > > > > Yes anything which can go to Fedora should be in Fedora, see my simcoupe > work of late for example. > > Regards, > > Hans > -- Xavier.t Lamien -- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/XavierLamien GPG-Key ID: F3903DEB Fingerprint: 0F2A 7A17 0F1B 82EE FCBF 1F51 76B7 A28D F390 3DEB
