| Joe Wreschnig 2006-01-29, 9:38 pm |
| On Wed, 2006-01-25 at 09:35 +0100, Lo=C3=AFc Minier wrote:
> Hi,
>=20
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2006, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
to[vbcol=seagreen]
>=20
> Yes, that's how I see it too.
>=20
>=20
> I think MAD support is in the "ugly" plugins precisely because it has =
a
> GPL dep (libmad). The fluendo mp3 plugin does not "taint" GStreamer.
> #317129 relates a similar problem.
In summary, Bastian is wrong. LGPLd code can be linked to GPLd code
without problem. It's when you mix in a non-GPL-compatible license as
well (as another module, or program) that the problems arise. I can't
imagine Debian ever including such a module (since I can't imagine
anyone writing a free-but-not-GPL-compatible module), so this isn't a
problem for us.
It only affects people that want to ship GStreamer with both MP3 support
and some proprietary modules like RA or WMA or something, or link it
against their GPL-incompatible program.
Debian ships a number of programs that use GStreamer and are licensed
under the GPL, without a GStreamer module exception. These present the
same "problem" (really, it's just copyleft as intended) as
gstreamer-mad, so gst-fluendo-mp3 doesn't get us anywhere practical,
from a license perspective.
MP3[vbcol=seagreen]
>=20
> I agree in general with your opinion, but I want to emphasize that I'm
> not preparing fluendo-mp3 _because_ ugly is still in NEW. It's only
> the more open license of fluendo-mp3 which motivated this decision.
Okay. I wondered if this was connected to the long time -ugly has spent
in NEW; I'm very glad to hear it's not.
--=20
Joe Wreschnig <piman@debian.org>
|