Once upon a time, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said: > Chris Adams wrote: > >Once upon a time, Brian Pepple <bpepple@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said: > >>On Sat, 2008-02-09 at 10:19 -0600, Chris Adams wrote: > >>>The free Flash players, as distributed in Fedora, will _always_ be > >>>broken, as they can't include MP3 for audio (at least until about 2017). > >>>If it allowable for codecbuddy to point to a gratis MP3 codec, why is it > >>>not allowable for something to point to a gratis Flash player, > >>>especially when it is the "standard" and the company behind it actually > >>>sets up a repo for use with Fedora (as opposed to the MP3 situation)? > >>The source code is available for the mp3 gstreamer plugin. The only > >>reason we can't include it in Fedora is due to US patent law. > >>Proprietary flash on the other hand is closed-sourced. > > > >Does codecbuddy point to the open source MP3 plugin or a proprietary MP3 > >plugin? > > We can't link to the open source version due to patent laws. I guess we > need to have this conversation every few weeks. That was a rhetorical question. Fedora has codecbuddy that points to a proprietary MP3 plugin. Picking on Flash (where a company is providing a Fedora-compatible repo for their software) seems wrong when Fedora includes software that points at other proprietary software. Fedora can't provide fully-functional Flash, so why can Flash not be like MP3 and have Fedora point at the Adobe repo? -- Chris Adams <cmadams@xxxxxxxxxx> Systems and Network Administrator - HiWAAY Internet Services I don't speak for anybody but myself - that's enough trouble. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
