On Tue, 2008-03-18 at 15:52 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Paul W. Frields (stickster@xxxxxxxxx) said: > > Some people clearly feel like codeina is doing the Fedora world a > > much-needed service, and others clearly feel that it isn't. The Board > > decided last week that it's in the latter camp[1], but the decision to > > keep the open-source MP3 codec offering and strip out the other > > closed-source codec offerings rankled several people[2,3,4]. > > > > [1] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2008-March/msg00111.html > > [2] http://bpepple.wordpress.com/2008/03/14/one-step-forward-two-steps-back/ > > [3] http://davidnielsen.wordpress.com/2008/03/15/fedora-board-masters-of-epic-fail/ > > [4] http://gregdek.livejournal.com/24120.html > > > > Other Board members and I responded[5,6,7] to invite people to discuss > > the matter here. > > > > [5] http://skvidal.wordpress.com/2008/03/15/patching-out-non-free-code-offers-in-codeina/ > > [6] http://paul.frields.org/?p=945 > > [7] http://iquaid.org/2008/03/16/fluendo-bastien-et-al-im-sorry-fwiw/ > > > > Is someone willing to take up maintainership of Codeina for F9 at this > > point? Would it be (A) fitting, or (B) autocratic, for someone on the > > Board to take up that responsibility? > > In my opinion, if you're going down the road of not shipping *any* links > in codeina, then patching of codeina to just show a dialog is pointless - > just nuke the package and implement the dialog elsewhere. +1 -sv -- I only speak for me. _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
