Bug#467324: Gnash in Desktop task?
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 01:13:02PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Miriam Ruiz wrote:
> > What do you think about #467324 ? Do you think it will make sense to
> > include Gnash in the Desktop task?
> >
> > Gnash is quite stable now, and even though not all Adobe Flash is
> > supported yet, it can be quite an improvement over not having any
> > flash player installed. As Adobe is adding DRM support in future Flash
> > spect, probably it won't be possible to circunvent those protection
> > measures in the future legally, and thus it can be quite important to
> > increase the user base of Gnash users and at some point in the future
> > maybe content designers might give it some attention.
> >
> > On the other side, as not all the Flash contents are fully working
> > (Youtube is working properly, anyway, which is one of the most
> > demanded Flash contents), it can be argued if end users might reject
> > it if it's shipped too early in Desktop. Probably all the Adobe specs
> > won't be ever supported, as Adobe keeps adding stuff at the same time
> > and there's no standards body organization taking care of that.
>
> I've had better luck with swfdec. It supports google video too.
> It also requires flash be clicked on before it will load it, which is a
> nice way to avoid flash ads and flash on unsupported sites.
My understanding is that both gnash and swfdec are currently robust pieces
of software. I'd be glad to see either being part of our default desktop.
That said, I'd like to point out that gnash seems much more popular (when
compared to its swfdec equivalents in sid):
3600 gnash 1730 641 618 470 1 (Miriam Ruiz)
6792 libswfdec-0.5-5 477 1 11 22 443 (Santiago Garcia Mantinan)
10380 libswfdec-0.6-90 208 76 0 119 13 (Santiago Garcia Mantinan)
--
Robert Millan
"The technological evasion of the license is as unacceptable as the
legal evasion of the license [...]. That's the provision in section
1 regarding keys. [...] We say one thing: when you sell somebody a
home... give him the keys" -- Eben Moglen on GPLv3
Reply to: