debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On 12-03-10 at 04:39pm, Eric Valette wrote:
> >> take a look at yavdr, openelec, geexbox, ubuntu studio and the
> >> packages they provide
> >>
> >> Readhttp://thelinuxcauldron.wordpress.com/2009/04/14/the-list-the-top-5-media-center-programs-for-linux/
> >> and see the one you have.
> >
> >Ahh, so your definition of "serious multimedia" is "media centers".
> >
> >Thanks for clarifying. I agree, that's an area Debian has too few
> >poeple devoted to currently. Please do consider to help out
> >yourself!
>
> Thanks for not copying me. Afraid I was going to answer?
No.
This list assumes subscription and welcomes explicit requests to cc:
http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
03-10-2012, 11:00 PM
Ben Finney
debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
Eric Valette <eric.valette@free.fr> writes:
> Thanks for not copying me. Afraid I was going to answer?
This mailing list, like all sensibly-run mailing lists, does not munge
the ‘Reply-To’ field. If you have a conversation in a public forum, the
onus is on you to participate in the discussion in that public forum.
> With actual policy (that I respect and understand), you are not going
> to provide stuff to circumvent protection means meaning I cannot watch
> even a dvd.
Your complaint, then, is against those who use the law to restrict your
use of your legally-acquired DVD or Blu-Ray disc and disingenuously call
it “protection”. It is misdirected against the Debian project.
> I help debugging XBMC and ffmpeg using debian packaging tool. Feel
> free to incorporate other people work.
A precondition is that the terms make it legally free to do that.
Thank you for your work to improve Debian for everyone.
--
“Cross country skiing is great if you live in a small country.” |
` —Steven Wright |
_o__) |
Ben Finney
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 87d38kj9b5.fsf@benfinney.id.au">http://lists.debian.org/87d38kj9b5.fsf@benfinney.id.au
03-11-2012, 09:48 AM
Vincent Bernat
debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
OoO Pendant le temps de midi du samedi 10 mars 2012, vers 12:30, Eric
Valette <eric.valette@free.fr> disait*:
> Yes acknowledged that vlc and mplayer are now up-to-date.
vlc 0.5.3 was released on April, 8 2003. Debian package on April, 14 2003.
vlc 0.8.6a was released on January, 4 2007. Debian package on January, 11 2007.
vlc 1.0.0 was released on July, 7 2009. Debian package on July, 9 2009.
vlc 1.1.0 was released on June, 22 2010. Debian package on June, 24 2010.
vlc 1.1.11 was released on July, 16 2011. Debian package on July, 18 2011.
vlc 2.0.0 was released on February, 18 2012. Debian package on the same day.
When exactly was vlc not up-to-date on Debian?
--
Vincent Bernat ☯ http://vincent.bernat.im
Don't use conditional branches as a substitute for a logical expression.
- The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)
03-11-2012, 10:05 AM
Eric Valette
debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
When exactly was vlc not up-to-date on Debian?
As long as it is unable to play dvd or various codec that are non
supported given the option for compiling libav for example
-- eric
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4F5C86F7.6010407@free.fr">http://lists.debian.org/4F5C86F7.6010407@free.fr
03-11-2012, 01:54 PM
Wouter Verhelst
debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 11:44:50AM +0100, Eric Valette wrote:
> On 10/03/2012 11:14, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> >Debian Squeeze has a very nice set of packages that will make
> >a good fit for this platform. What do you think will be lacking
> >exactly?
>
> XBMC, up to date ffmpeg at least with some non-free extensions for sure.
Actually, ffmpeg changed names to libav recently. The latter is in
Debian (unstable), not yet in debian-multimedia.org's unstable
repository.
Also, I fail to see why you need to be so agressive. Please calm down a
bit.
For the longest time, Debian didn't provide certain patent-encumbered
packages because we thought we couldn't, for legal reasons. Recently,
however, this policy has been changed after we received some legal
advice from lawyers specializing in the area, and as a result the
pkg-multimedia folks are now uploading packages without removal of
features.
If all goes well, eventually debian-multimedia will be obsolete because
everything is in Debian proper; and that would always be better than
having an extra repository, don't you think?
[...]
--
The volume of a pizza of thickness a and radius z can be described by
the following formula:
pi zz a
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120311145428.GH22670@grep.be">http://lists.debian.org/20120311145428.GH22670@grep.be
03-11-2012, 04:21 PM
Jonas Smedegaard
debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
[CC Eric - drop all other CCs]
On 12-03-11 at 03:54pm, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 11:44:50AM +0100, Eric Valette wrote:
> > On 10/03/2012 11:14, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> > >Debian Squeeze has a very nice set of packages that will make a
> > >good fit for this platform. What do you think will be lacking
> > >exactly?
> >
> > XBMC, up to date ffmpeg at least with some non-free extensions for
> > sure.
>
> Actually, ffmpeg changed names to libav recently. The latter is in
> Debian (unstable), not yet in debian-multimedia.org's unstable
> repository.
Not exactly: Libav is a _fork_ of FFmpeg.
/me now expecting a looong subthread on how Debian is stupid and wrong
in maintaining LibAV instead of FFmpeg...
[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
03-16-2012, 01:23 AM
Chris Knadle
debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On Monday, March 05, 2012 10:42:50, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
...
> Friendly discussion with the maintainer of debian-multimedia.org to
> not replace libraries such as libavcodec and friends have failed
> ultimatively (BTW, that is part of the reason why we've ended up with
> an epoch of '4', dmo uses epoch '5'); he has repeatedly shown that is
> not interested in collaborating with pkg-multimedia at all. He also
> does not seem interested in installing libraries in a way that they do
> not interfere with 'official' Debian packages (e.g., by changing
> SONAMES, or installing in private directories, etc.).
I've been trying to find where these discussions occurred, but I'm unable to
find them in either [dmo-discussion] mailing list archives (which go back as
far as June 2010), nor in the [debian-multimedia] mailing list at least as far
back as January 2010. The latter archives go as far back as May 2003, but I
stopped looking at Jan 2010 because had hoped to see at least some public
discussion somewhere back when Squeeze was being prepared for release.
The only emails I've been able to find seem curteous and professional on both
sides:
Christian Marrilat apparently uses a Pin: release o=Unofficial Multimedia
Packages (rather than l=Unofficial ...) explaining to someone how to try to
avoid conflicts with the Debian Experimental repo [1]
Christian Marrilat sending a patch for libv4l-dev to debian-multimedia [2]
NMU from Stefano Zacchiroli which seems to included the above patch [3]
> While debian-multimedia.org has gained a reputation of providing
> packages, which were desperately lacking in Debian,
> IMO this repository has turned into a major source of trouble and
> pissed users provoking flamewars in the recent past.
If so I haven't seen that on [dmo-discussion] or [debian-multimedia] either.
If these happened on [debian-devel] then I can understand how I missed them as
the traffic here is relatively high.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 201203152223.13631.Chris.Knadle@coredump.us">http://lists.debian.org/201203152223.13631.Chris.Knadle@coredump.us
03-16-2012, 08:06 PM
Reinhard Tartler
debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 3:23 AM, Chris Knadle <Chris.Knadle@coredump.us> wrote:
> On Monday, March 05, 2012 10:42:50, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> ...
>> Friendly discussion with the maintainer of debian-multimedia.org to
>> not replace libraries such as libavcodec and friends have failed
>> ultimatively (BTW, that is part of the reason why we've ended up with
>> an epoch of '4', dmo uses epoch '5'); *he has repeatedly shown that is
>> not interested in collaborating with pkg-multimedia at all. He also
>> does not seem interested in installing libraries in a way that they do
>> not interfere with 'official' Debian packages (e.g., by changing
>> SONAMES, or installing in private directories, etc.).
>
> I've been trying to find where these discussions occurred, but I'm unable to
> find them in either [dmo-discussion] mailing list archives (which go back as
> far as June 2010), nor in the [debian-multimedia] mailing list at least as far
> back as January 2010.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: CAJ0cceZZ+G56DLW4yp=QF5DgP-tww_NWKyO91b=aqCJT0wy=-g@mail.gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/CAJ0cceZZ+G56DLW4yp=QF5DgP-tww_NWKyO91b=aqCJT0wy=-g@mail.gmail.com
03-16-2012, 08:34 PM
Andres Mejia
debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Reinhard Tartler <siretart@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 3:23 AM, Chris Knadle <Chris.Knadle@coredump.us> wrote:
>> On Monday, March 05, 2012 10:42:50, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
>> ...
>>> Friendly discussion with the maintainer of debian-multimedia.org to
>>> not replace libraries such as libavcodec and friends have failed
>>> ultimatively (BTW, that is part of the reason why we've ended up with
>>> an epoch of '4', dmo uses epoch '5'); *he has repeatedly shown that is
>>> not interested in collaborating with pkg-multimedia at all. He also
>>> does not seem interested in installing libraries in a way that they do
>>> not interfere with 'official' Debian packages (e.g., by changing
>>> SONAMES, or installing in private directories, etc.).
>>
>> I've been trying to find where these discussions occurred, but I'm unable to
>> find them in either [dmo-discussion] mailing list archives (which go back as
>> far as June 2010), nor in the [debian-multimedia] mailing list at least as far
>> back as January 2010.
>
> Try the pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list:
>
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/2008-November/002221.html
>
> --
> regards,
> * * Reinhard
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
> Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAJ0cceZZ+G56DLW4ypQF5DgP-tww_NWKyO91baqCJT0wy-g@mail.gmail.com
>
Here's another one, showing more or less what Reinhard has been saying.
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=592457
--
~ Andres
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: CAPM41nP68-aAiOoqF1Q0mpT1TLKBRmgp1BAMuye8CrmWmGHbAQ@mail.gmai l.com">http://lists.debian.org/CAPM41nP68-aAiOoqF1Q0mpT1TLKBRmgp1BAMuye8CrmWmGHbAQ@mail.gmai l.com
03-16-2012, 11:40 PM
Chris Knadle
debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Reinhard Tartler <siretart@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 3:23 AM, Chris Knadle <Chris.Knadle@coredump.us>
wrote:
> >> On Monday, March 05, 2012 10:42:50, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> >> ...
> >>
> >>> Friendly discussion with the maintainer of debian-multimedia.org to
> >>> not replace libraries such as libavcodec and friends have failed
> >>> ultimatively (BTW, that is part of the reason why we've ended up with
> >>> an epoch of '4', dmo uses epoch '5'); he has repeatedly shown that is
> >>> not interested in collaborating with pkg-multimedia at all. He also
> >>> does not seem interested in installing libraries in a way that they do
> >>> not interfere with 'official' Debian packages (e.g., by changing
> >>> SONAMES, or installing in private directories, etc.).
> >>
> >> I've been trying to find where these discussions occurred, but I'm
> >> unable to find them in either [dmo-discussion] mailing list archives
> >> (which go back as far as June 2010), nor in the [debian-multimedia]
> >> mailing list at least as far back as January 2010.
> >
> > Try the pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list:
On this all I see is a request on the mailing list meant for Christian
re:epoch, but no reply. It's also 4 years ago, before the release of Lenny.
> > --
> > regards,
> > Reinhard
Other emails I see on [pkg-multimedia-maintainers] going back to 2010:
Christian Marrilat:
Mar 19 2011 (helpful):
Bug#618899: libffms2-dev: Missing dependecies [1]
Aug 14 2011 (quite interesting):
Bug#637758: libmp4v2-dev: Should be architecture any and not all [2]
Nov 19 2010 (snide):
Bug#544062: ITP: xcfa -- X Convert File Audio [3]
Christian might be opinionated, but it also seems to me like he's trying to
work (at least some) with d.o AFAICS.
Another recent thread relating to d-m.o:
Andres Mejia, Mar 5 2012:
Fwd: Re: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains [4]
Reinhard Tartler Mar 5 2012 (interesting):
Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains [5]
Logic question: why is debian-multimedia.org considered a Debian domain when
it's not under a *.debian.org DNS name, but yet something *.debian.net is not
considered part of Debian? Is anything "*[debian]*.org" of issue?
On Friday, March 16, 2012 17:34:12, Andres Mejia wrote:
...
>
> Here's another one, showing more or less what Reinhard has been saying.
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=592457
Yes I've read the above bug report previously -- it's simultaneously mildly
shocking but also not very illuminating. Christian gets frustrated when his
bug report is lowered in severity after 4 weeks with no explanation, S.Z.
makes an insinuation of a problem between Christian and ffmpeg maintainers.
There are several ways to read between the lines there.
Thankfully even though the social outcome is somewhat negative, the bug has a
positive technical outcome.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 201203162040.08869.Chris.Knadle@coredump.us">http://lists.debian.org/201203162040.08869.Chris.Knadle@coredump.us
debian-multimedia.org considered harmful, Was: Unofficial repositories on 'debian' domains
