On Thursday 06 October 2011 17:17:01 Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 10/06/2011 09:20 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote: > > On Thursday 06 October 2011 16:06:13 Raphael Groner wrote: > >> So, I don't see any needs for Adobe closed source binaries any more in > >> a distribution that claims to be completely open and free. > >> > >> http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/lightspark/wiki/Building#TheeasywayonFe > >> dora > >> > >> Don't ask me why available only in RPM Fusion and not the official > >> Fedora repo. > > > > So, why is it available only in RPMFusion and not the official repo? :-) > > Is it not completely open and free, maybe? > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Software_Patents > > It depends on ffmpeg which has patent encumbered codecs. Flash files > tend to use MP3 for audio and unless the player can use gstreamer > instead of ffmpeg (which is the case for Gnash), it can't be in Fedora. Oh, my question was meant to be rhetorical. :-) I am aware of the ffmpeg dependency, and was just trying to hint that what is provided by Adobe and what is provided by RPMFusion is equally "not in Fedora". The user who cares most about flash functionality will install the plugin from Adobe, while the user who cares most about open source principles will install Lightspark from RPMFusion. However, in both cases the user taints the original Fedora distro. Best, :-) Marko -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
