Re: mpeg encoder patents, Was: Bug#501190: ITP: moonlight
Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> Robert Millan <email@example.com> writes:
>>> At the very least, we could distribute them in a specific "patented"
>>> section, with rules similar to non-free, and that we’d only mirror in
>>> countries where it is not a problem.
>> While we are at it, would be nice to have a section for DMCA-impaired
>> software such as libdvdcss.
> How about this:
> - introduce a new section 'patented'
> - packages in 'patented' must fulfill the requirements of the dfsg
> - source packages in 'main' may produce binaries in 'patented'
> - binary packages in 'main' must not depend on packages in 'patented'
> - source packages in 'main' may build-depend on packages in 'patented'
This is problematic for a self-buildable main everywhere, no ?
> - source and binary packages in 'patented' may depend on package on
> both 'main' and 'patented'
> - source packages in 'patented' must not produce binaries in 'main'
> - packages in 'contrib' and 'non-free' may additionally depend on
> in 'patented'
Sounds good for the rest...
Swisslinux.org − Le carrefour GNU/Linux en Suisse −