FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > ArchLinux > ArchLinux Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 12-22-2009, 10:29 AM
Giovanni Scafora
 
Default Moonlight in Arch Linux

2009/12/22, Daniel Isenmann <daniel.isenmann@gmx.de>:
> Any objections from your side?

+1 to bring it to [extra].
I also can help you, upgrading it if needed.


--
Arch Linux Developer
http://www.archlinux.org
http://www.archlinux.it
 
Old 12-22-2009, 11:18 AM
Daniel Isenmann
 
Default Moonlight in Arch Linux

On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 03:29:14 -0800
Giovanni Scafora <giovanni@archlinux.org> wrote:

> 2009/12/22, Daniel Isenmann <daniel.isenmann@gmx.de>:
> > Any objections from your side?
>
> +1 to bring it to [extra].
> I also can help you, upgrading it if needed.
>
>

Thanks, but I have already a running version of moonlight 2.0
So, that's no problem.
 
Old 12-22-2009, 11:27 AM
Ionut Biru
 
Default Moonlight in Arch Linux

On 12/22/2009 12:01 PM, Daniel Isenmann wrote:

Hi,

I know that this topic was discussed in January this year and we
decided to put it to AUR and if it have enough votes to [community].

For all new developers, here is the discussion from January:
http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2009-January/010029.html

Now it's in community, but it's outdated and which is the real problem,
you must build it with a fresh built and installed mono during
compilation time. It depends very close to mono and therefor I would
like to bring it to [extra], to maintain it with the rest of the mono
stack which I already do.

Also a bug report was posted because of this issue:
http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/17573

The maintainer in community seems not be active anymore (Timm Preetz)
and moonlight is orphan.

Any objections from your side?

Cheers,
Daniel


+1

--
Ionut
 
Old 12-22-2009, 03:44 PM
Aaron Griffin
 
Default Moonlight in Arch Linux

On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 6:18 AM, Daniel Isenmann <daniel.isenmann@gmx.de> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 03:29:14 -0800
> Giovanni Scafora <giovanni@archlinux.org> wrote:
>
>> 2009/12/22, Daniel Isenmann <daniel.isenmann@gmx.de>:
>> > *Any objections from your side?
>>
>> +1 to bring it to [extra].
>> I also can help you, upgrading it if needed.
>>
>>
>
> Thanks, but I have already a running version of moonlight 2.0
> So, that's no problem.

As long as it's maintained, I don't see a problem with this.

However, isn't there some legal issues with Moonlight? I saw recently
that Microsoft "pledged" not to sue Moonlight users....
 
Old 12-22-2009, 04:04 PM
Pierre Schmitz
 
Default Moonlight in Arch Linux

On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 10:44:43 -0600, Aaron Griffin
<aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 6:18 AM, Daniel Isenmann
<daniel.isenmann@gmx.de>
> wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 03:29:14 -0800
>> Giovanni Scafora <giovanni@archlinux.org> wrote:
>>
>>> 2009/12/22, Daniel Isenmann <daniel.isenmann@gmx.de>:
>>> > *Any objections from your side?
>>>
>>> +1 to bring it to [extra].
>>> I also can help you, upgrading it if needed.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Thanks, but I have already a running version of moonlight 2.0
>> So, that's no problem.
>
> As long as it's maintained, I don't see a problem with this.
>
> However, isn't there some legal issues with Moonlight? I saw recently
> that Microsoft "pledged" not to sue Moonlight users....

There are no issues as software patents do not exist for us. :P

--
Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre
 
Old 12-22-2009, 04:12 PM
Aaron Griffin
 
Default Moonlight in Arch Linux

On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 10:44:43 -0600, Aaron Griffin
> <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 6:18 AM, Daniel Isenmann
> <daniel.isenmann@gmx.de>
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 03:29:14 -0800
>>> Giovanni Scafora <giovanni@archlinux.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 2009/12/22, Daniel Isenmann <daniel.isenmann@gmx.de>:
>>>> > *Any objections from your side?
>>>>
>>>> +1 to bring it to [extra].
>>>> I also can help you, upgrading it if needed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks, but I have already a running version of moonlight 2.0
>>> So, that's no problem.
>>
>> As long as it's maintained, I don't see a problem with this.
>>
>> However, isn't there some legal issues with Moonlight? I saw recently
>> that Microsoft "pledged" not to sue Moonlight users....
>
> There are no issues as software patents do not exist for us. :P

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ForbiddenItems#Moonlight
 
Old 12-22-2009, 04:28 PM
Pierre Schmitz
 
Default Moonlight in Arch Linux

On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 11:12:30 -0600, Aaron Griffin
<aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>> However, isn't there some legal issues with Moonlight? I saw recently
>>> that Microsoft "pledged" not to sue Moonlight users....
>>
>> There are no issues as software patents do not exist for us. :P
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ForbiddenItems#Moonlight

Moonlight is licensed under the GPL. Who cares what patent problems it
might have in the US?

Of course this plugin is quite useless anyway (only works with firefox and
those few sites using silverlight only seem to support the microsoft
implementation). But I am fine with it if Daniel wants to maintain it.

--
Pierre Schmitz, https://users.archlinux.de/~pierre
 
Old 12-22-2009, 04:40 PM
Aaron Griffin
 
Default Moonlight in Arch Linux

On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 11:12:30 -0600, Aaron Griffin
> <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>>> However, isn't there some legal issues with Moonlight? I saw recently
>>>> that Microsoft "pledged" not to sue Moonlight users....
>>>
>>> There are no issues as software patents do not exist for us. :P
>>
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ForbiddenItems#Moonlight
>
> Moonlight is licensed under the GPL. Who cares what patent problems it
> might have in the US?
>
> Of course this plugin is quite useless anyway (only works with firefox and
> those few sites using silverlight only seem to support the microsoft
> implementation). But I am fine with it if Daniel wants to maintain it.

Well, there are those of us here in the US and we do have US users and
mirrors. From a reading of the Groklaw piece[1], I see it as
"Microsoft can sue any users of the software that did not get
Moonlight direct from Novell". The "Downstream Recipients" part of the
covenant seems to NOT cover mirrors. This says to me that we'd be
opening up our mirrors to being sued for redistribution of patented
material.

As for the "Who care's what patent problems it might have in the US?"
part - I care. US users care. US mirrors care. We've already taken
steps to specifically appease the German audience (remember: we
removed Analytics because of some German law), why doesn't this door
swing both ways?

1: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080528133529454
 
Old 12-22-2009, 04:48 PM
Daniel Isenmann
 
Default Moonlight in Arch Linux

On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 18:28:01 +0100
Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:

> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 11:12:30 -0600, Aaron Griffin
> <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>> However, isn't there some legal issues with Moonlight? I saw
> >>> recently that Microsoft "pledged" not to sue Moonlight users....
> >>
> >> There are no issues as software patents do not exist for us. :P
> >
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ForbiddenItems#Moonlight
>
> Moonlight is licensed under the GPL. Who cares what patent problems it
> might have in the US?
>
> Of course this plugin is quite useless anyway (only works with
> firefox and those few sites using silverlight only seem to support
> the microsoft implementation). But I am fine with it if Daniel wants
> to maintain it.
>

Pierre is right on this point. It's distributed under GNU LGPL and the
MIT X11 licenses. It's compiled against ffmpeg to support more codecs.

But it's wrong what you said, Pierre. If you go to the showcase website
of Microsoft for Silverlight, nearly all demos are working with
moonlight.

Otherwise to avoid some legal issues (which I don't believe that
there are one) we can say to our users that they can install it through
this website: http://go-mono.com/moonlight/download.aspx

Otherwise if someone want to develop silverlight/moonlight application
under Arch Linux he can't because of the missing SDK which comes with
the package I would build from source.

About the "Covenant..." thing, I don't really understand it, it's too
much "high" english for me.

Daniel
 
Old 12-22-2009, 04:53 PM
Aaron Griffin
 
Default Moonlight in Arch Linux

On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Daniel Isenmann
<daniel.isenmann@gmx.de> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 18:28:01 +0100
> Pierre Schmitz <pierre@archlinux.de> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 11:12:30 -0600, Aaron Griffin
>> <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>> However, isn't there some legal issues with Moonlight? I saw
>> >>> recently that Microsoft "pledged" not to sue Moonlight users....
>> >>
>> >> There are no issues as software patents do not exist for us. :P
>> >
>> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ForbiddenItems#Moonlight
>>
>> Moonlight is licensed under the GPL. Who cares what patent problems it
>> might have in the US?
>>
>> Of course this plugin is quite useless anyway (only works with
>> firefox and those few sites using silverlight only seem to support
>> the microsoft implementation). But I am fine with it if Daniel wants
>> to maintain it.
>>
>
> Pierre is right on this point. It's distributed under GNU LGPL and the
> MIT X11 licenses. It's compiled against ffmpeg to support more codecs.

To be clear, GPL and other license cover copyright. This is about
patents. (Those stupid, stupid software patents).
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 02:55 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org