Plan for tomorrow's (20090821) FESCo meeting

[Adam Jackson]

On Fri, 2009-08-21 at 16:26 +0200, Jochen Schmitt wrote:

> - From my point of view. This cases demostrate, that we need a
> clarification about the requirements which a package has to fullfill
> for inclusssion into Fedora.

I don't disagree, but...

> Package which are only useable if you have installed a package which
> is not part of Fedora may not allow for Fedora. This is the argument
> why we not contributes eumulators. In common emulators requires
> special ROM images which contains copyright content.

I think this is a faulty generalization.

X is a network protocol.  vdpau and xnvctrl applications can be
perfectly functional running on a Fedora machine with no nvidia driver
installed, if they happen to be talking to some _other_ machine
somewhere in the world that does support those extensions.  One might
argue that this is a trivial distinction, and that it still requires
some non-free blob to be made to work, but to make that assertion you're
basically saying that interoperability is only acceptable if there's
some free implementation of what you're interoperating with.  If you
follow that idea through, you end up removing pilot-link, libgpod...

The emulator rule-of-thumb makes sense to the extent that the emulator
itself is the end goal.  If the only reason you could want it installed
is to play some arcade game ROM then there's pretty clearly no
interoperability argument to be made.  But libvdpau isn't the end goal;
the VDPAU app is the end goal.  libvdpau is just how you get there.

The emulator RoT also assumes that the copyright holder of the magic
bits doesn't _want_ you to use them.  NVIDIA clearly wants people to use
VDPAU.

- ajax
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20090821/9b925730/attachment.bin