Hi Christoph, Thank you for your reply.Let's assume that the reject reason is valid. What is the procedure I must follow to submit the odr-audioenc package to non-free? Is there any debian file I must amend for non-free as well ?
On a more "philisophical" aspect, would it make sense to submit the other 3 odr packages to non-free as well, even if they don't rely on this fdk-aac library/license, in order to keep software distribution consistency. I would find rather odd, as a user, to grab 1 package from non-free and the other 3 from main...
Robin On 17.10.22 16:46, Christoph Berg wrote:
Re: Robin Alexanderodr-audioenc_3.2.0-1_amd64.changes was REJECTED. The reason being: " license clause is compatible with DFSG: You may use this FDK AAC Codec software or modifications thereto only for purposes that are authorized by appropriate patent licenses. " Actually, odr-audioenc depends on the Fraunhofer FDK AAC Codec Library for Android which can be modified and distributed. I saw somewhere that debian nevertheless considers this license as being non-free. If that is the case, can the package still be pushed to Debian (maybe through a different process) or not. If it cannot, then I believe that it makes no sense to keep the other 3 packages in the debian project and to remove them before bookworm is finalized.Hi Robin, I haven't reviewed the license, but if the reject reason is true, the package would have to be uploaded to non-free, and any (free) software depending on it would have to go to contrib (or to non-free as well). Are there any alternative libraries that could be used instead? Christoph
-- Robin ALEXANDER
Attachment:
OpenPGP_0xB44D368855690D0F.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature