[CinCV] Cinelerra as an advocacy tool
Hi, FYI: http://www.grep.be/blog/en/computer/cinelerra_as_advocacy :-) regards, Holger signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [CinCV] debian/changelog is outdated
Hi, On Donnerstag, 29. Januar 2009, Johannes Sixt wrote: The most recent entry in debian/changelog is dated 2006-09-12. This is quite aged. Indeed :-/ Is there a knowledgable Debian developer who knows how to bring this file up-to-date in a meaningful way? Technically, there is the nice tool dch (part of the devscripts package), which greatly simplefies editing debian/changelog in the right format. Contentwise the file should contain changes in the packaging. So stuff like new upstream version with great feature foo or added a depends to libschroedinger as requiered by new upstream version or whatever. (So Debian packages often ship two changelog files: the upstream one and the debian one. And I think that very much makes sense.) Is this file of any use for our Debian/Ubuntu packagers? Or do you keep your own versions of the debian/ directory anyway? What's the best way to proceed here? I havent looked at cinelerra (in regards to packaging) for more then a year probably, mostly because I'm sad that it's impossible to get cinelerra into Debian main due to some licence problems and some embedded code copies - at least that's what the status was last year. If this has been fixed, w00t. That said, shipping a debian/ directory in release tarballs is usually not helpful for maintainers as they keep there own version in some repo anyway. If cooperation between packagers and developers exist, it's nice to have it in the same repo but a different branch. (As to be able to make different packaging releases based on the exact same upstream tarball/checkout.) That said :) in future (=after Debian lenny has been released) a debian/ directory in the (upstream) tarball will be silenty thrown away anyway (by dpkg 3.0 source format) so that the debian/ directory will always come as a debian-diff. So I would suggest to keep it now, to not make life harder for current users of it :) regards, Holger (offline written) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [CinCV] Unmet dependencies Debian Etch
Hi, On Tuesday 11 November 2008 02:10, Daniel Jircik wrote: I had reached the same conclusion that it breaks at Marillat. Has anyone of you contacted Marillat about those issues? In my experience he reacts fast and well and is quite happy about feedback! :) regards, Holger pgpy2P64V2LrX.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [CinCV] capture video with new firewire modules?
Hi, On Friday 28 March 2008 11:53, KH KH wrote: You need to backlist the new juju firewire modules and that's all. No need to rebuild the whole kernel for theses. (only eth1394 cannot be rebuild that way). I'm providing sid kernels for Debian, which the only change compared to sid, that they additionally have the old firewire stack enabled. More information is available at http://layer-acht.org/blog/debian/#1-155 regards, Holger, who is excited to read about progress with juju here... pgpUOw5am32JP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [CinCVS] Cin-3 naming.
Hi, On Friday 01 February 2008 18:44, Cory K. wrote: No. Its not part of Ubuntu Studio. The license issues were just too much. We did however endorse muzzol's repo. endorse as in propose and tell people about it or by proving a installer package or such? Whatever comes from this new effort we will help to get it into Debian/Ubuntu as much as we can. Cool! :) regards, Holger pgpRY0xKtzT35.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [CinCVS] Cin-3 naming.
Hi, On Sunday 27 January 2008 05:42, Cory K. wrote: I just wanted to throw this one out there. Freecine I actually like that name. And it reminded me of another option, icecine, but I think I like FreeCine much better :-) While hammering on it to try to free it up to get it into Debian/Ubuntu we considered a name change because of all the changes and to make it clear it was different than Cinelerra. Isn't cinelerra part of Ubuntu studio already? I thought so, but cant check right onw, as I'm writing this offline... If so, I wonder how you deal with the licencing problems (the copyright of some files is not clear, details in the Debian ITP bug), which is why cinelerra is not in Debian. regards, Holger pgpV3lOxArBmH.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [CinCVS] Re: status of GPL headers - finished
Hi, On Wednesday 11 April 2007 21:16, Nicolas Maufrais wrote: Well done, flavio and nighto ! Thumbs up! ;-) Indeed, cheers! I hope this continues and cinelerra in Debian lenny will become reality! regards, Holger pgpwh9O6J7smK.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [CinCVS] Status of GPL Headers
Hi, On Wednesday 28 February 2007 19:34, flavio wrote: when scanning, then, if there is a header saying it is GPL, LGPL or if there is no header at all, the file is fine, no reports. if it says anything else, post a report for further investigation. is that it? As I understand it, no header means no copyright+licence information, ergo normal (=non copyleft) copyright applies, ergo not ok for distribution. regards, Holger pgpyPMxDxYLIm.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [CinCVS] gpl headers
Hi, On Wednesday 31 January 2007 10:02, muzzol wrote: 2007/1/31, Andraž Tori [EMAIL PROTECTED]: i believe there was talk about _exactly_ this few months ago on this list. Yes :) I'm happily read this thread and will happily maintain cinelerra in debian once the licence issues are resolved. BTW, last time I looked there were also quite some libaries copied into the cinelerra sourcetree - this is bad from a maintainance point of view (security patches need to be applied many times) but this also effects the debian/copyright file: the author of every software included and its licence need to be mentioned there. It was resolved by someone contacting Adam and getting clearance for the code he wrote. Now someone must check if there are any other files in the tree and clear up all of the cases. yes. there's no grey areas here. we have the confirmation. Aeh, did Adam really write _all_ the code (from those files without GPL statements)? He only gave clarification for the code he wrote. This is still serious progress (cheers!) but - as I understand it - we are not there yet. regards, Holger pgpJc0M3Cfgao.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [CinCVS] ubuntu packaging
Hi, On Wednesday 08 November 2006 18:30, Andraž Tori wrote: - request for adding this package to official repos: if we can get a stable relase scheduling and people start using this packages we can consider send a request to debian/ubuntu teams to get cinelerra in their repos and gain popularity, users and world dominance. Please read http://bugs.debian.org/331072 - cinelerra has legal and technical problems, 1000 files from 3000 in the source code have no licence attached to it. This can only be fixed by heroine virtual, as it's their code. Also cinelerra includes copies of some libraries, instead of using the packaged ones. This is a security nightmare to maintain. Until these legal and technical issues are fixed, cinelerra will not become part of Debian. Nor Ubuntu. If this situation has been fixed by now, I would be very glad to hear and be proven wrong. what might be more plausable is adding it to marillat repository, since it shares our values regarding what to include... You mean you also don't give a about legal issues and just want stuff that's works but cannot be distributed in most parts of the world? Or what? I'm sorry to sound so harsh... but I brought this up two times already in the last 2 months and nobody seems to care. regards, Holger pgpuVebDSbjVK.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [CinCVS] ubuntu package maintainer
Hi, On Wednesday 25 October 2006 01:43, Andraž Tori wrote: we really need ubuntu package maintainer. If cinelerra-cvs could be packaged for debian, ubuntu could just take it. Unfortunatly there are many legal problems in cinelerra (or were, but last time I looked they were and I have not seen an indication that this has been fixed), so cinelerra-cvs cannot be included in debian atm. See http://bugs.debian.org/331072 and more specifically http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi/cinelerra-cvs-sources.txt?bug=331072;msg=25;att=1 to see what I mean... regards, Holger pgpip7hKmnuGP.pgp Description: PGP signature
[CinCVS] Re: Bug#331072: ITP: cinelerra-cvs -- non-linear video editor and compositor for Linux.
Hi, wow, almost exactly one year :-/ On Wednesday 05 October 2005 21:59, giskard wrote: ... I was reminded of this issue when I saw that #156614 was closed (an RFP for cinelerra). A while ago cinelerra(-cvs) 2.1 has been released and I would like to know if the issues described in this bug (see http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=331072) and specifically the licence-issues listed in http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi/cinelerra-cvs-sources.txt?bug=331072;msg=25;att=1 have been fixed. regards, Holger pgpisNtQMDKK4.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [CinCVS] Beginner-friendly user interface (was: about starting over...)
Hi, On Monday 31 July 2006 12:07, Eric Seigne wrote: For french lprod users i've made a new skin-plugin: http://fr.lprod.org/wiki/doku.php?id=video:cinelerra:pluginlprod This is more gnome look but it's just a cinelerra skin. Wow! IMHO this is really good! Cause the normal cinelerra GUI scares many people away just because it looks so different. So this skin really helps! Is there anything french specific in it at all or can it be used for any language? regards, Holger pgpNQr845xFcG.pgp Description: PGP signature
