Re: Bug#176267: ITP: mplayer -- Mplayer is a full-featured audioand video player for UN*X like systems
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Jeff Licquia wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-01-29 at 09:43, Seth Woolley wrote:
> > All I see from you people is "he's a bad, bad boy" and nothing
> > substantive. You also whine as much as he does.
> > You guys blew the libmpeg2 "issue" way out of proportion, considering the
> > libmpeg2 author was in on the whole thing.
s/You guys/a guy/ my mistake.
> I haven't seen a statement from the libmpeg2 author in this whole thread
> concerning his "in-ness" on "the whole thing".
There was a reply from the MPlayer author who wrote the libmpeg2 part. If
you want something other than that, you can ask the libmpeg2 author
yourself. It is on -devel.
> Do you believe everything someone says on the Internet? No? Then why
> should we? Why is it so offensive that we ask for proof?
The only way you're getting proof besides a statement from them is to
directly contact the libmpeg2 author. I think it's on track to be being
included, so I don't really feel like adding much more to the
discussion at this point.
> > Here's what you can do:
> > "I know others mischaracterized the situation, but here's a real issue..."
> > So far, nobody's done this.
> Then you should rest easy, as it's very likely that such high-quality,
> free, uncontroversial software will be a shoo-in for inclusion.
I agree. I'm resting easy.
> it would seem that someone is already hard at work to make this a
> reality. If the legal situation with mplayer is as you say, then
> "apt-get install mplayer" should be a reality in a jiffy.
> That is your goal, right? Or are you (and others) just interested in
> slamming people when you say things like that?
Is pointing out that there hasn't been a real issue demonstrated slamming
people? Then I apologize.
I don't want to slam people. I just couldn't find anywhere in all the
responses why the MPlayer devs were being treated exclusively the way they
were. The only successful point on-issue (there are a lot off-issue) was
when the MPlayer devs pointed out the Xine unfair treatment. I don't care
if the MPlayer devs are pissy at you. Perhaps I also unfairly grouped
- -legal into a group when I shouldn't have.
My want to have MPlayer included in THE major distro was emotional, and I
cast the net a bit too wide.
Apparently I made the same grouping mistake here too:
As I think this will be resolved soon anyways, I'll try to avoid posting
Seth Alan Woolley <seth at tautology.org>, SPAM/UCE is unauthorized
Key id 7BEACC7D = 2978 0BD1 BA48 B671 C1EB 93F7 EDF4 3CDF 7BEA CC7D
Full Key at seth.tautology.org, see www.gnupg.org www.keyserver.net
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (FreeBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----