On Mon, 1 Oct 2012 08:58:38 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > Right, I saw that, but it's not clear if MP3 falls
under "not allowed to
> > ship even as source code". If that's the case, shouldn't we just
> Then you would need to explain what you're thinking.
If a package includes MP3 source code but does not enable it, that literally
complies with "MP3 encoding and decoding support is not included in any
Fedora application", which is the directive in the Forbidden Items section.
It's my understanding that at least one open source MP3 implementation
operates under this theory. The question is whether that's actually good
enough, or whether MP3 actually falls under "patents or trademarks that we
are not allowed to ship even as source code".
The MP3 codec is patented => we must not ship it at all => not even as
Following the logic of the-exception-proves-the-rule, that last
implies that *is* source code which includes patents which we *are* able to
ship in that form. Again, is MP3 included?
Same as above.
My impression had been that it is not, and that we always patch it
then I came across this reviewed, accepted package which has been in Fedora
for three and a half years, so I wanted to check if that was a mistake or if
my attitude had been over-zealous.
Doing reviews isn't easy.
Fedora release 17 (Beefy Miracle) - Linux 3.5.4-2.fc17.x86_64
loadavg: 0.08 0.18 0.21