OpenH264 in Fedora
rc040203 at freenet.de
Mon Nov 4 14:49:13 UTC 2013
On 11/04/2013 03:39 PM, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-11-02 at 21:29 +0100, Björn Persson wrote:
>> Fedora mustn't have third-party repositories like RPM Fusion enabled by
>> default. Users must consciously configure them.
>> Therefore Fedora mustn't download Cisco's binaries by default. It will
>> have to be something that users must consciously configure.
> It can ask the user whether he wants to opt-in/out for the plugin installation, removing this mechanism at all won't help the users.
>> So what's the big deal? If Cisco goes through with this, then there
>> will be one more free but patent-encumbered implementation. Another
>> implementation doesn't hurt, but I don't see how it solves any
>> fundamental problems.
> It solves a fundamental problem, you have to pay MPEG-LA a license to
> distribute binaries, so now we have a source that is willing to produce
> binaries for as many architectures as we need that are licensed by
Your reasoning basically is the same as it applies to any
non-distributable piece of non-open source SW, be it non-open due to
licensing or patent reasons. I.e. thiis reasoning contradicts the
working principles of open source and Fedora.
More information about the devel