Re: mpeg encoder patents, Was: Bug#501190: ITP: moonlight

[Didier Raboud <didier@raboud.com>]

Reinhard Tartler wrote:

> Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.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
>  packages
>    in 'patented'

Sounds good for the rest...

Regards, 

OdyX

-- 
Swisslinux.org − Le carrefour GNU/Linux en Suisse −
http://www.swisslinux.org