On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 02:30:03PM -0800, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 11:02:40PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > > > Ok, so why doesn't mplayer get's accepted in debian now ? > > I have no idea, nor is it my responsibility to know. I can only say that > your claims so far are all either extremely implausible, or demonstrably > false.
Well, there are two issues here, one is why mplayer is not in debian. Supposedly it was because the legal situation was not clear and that made it dangerous and maybe illegal for us to distribute it. I wonder why ubuntu does not have this problem (even it if is in universe/multiverse), and if maybe this means the problems got solved and it could be included in debian now, or maybe because ubuntu just didn't care about the legal dubious situation. The second issue is that there is some kind of distrust of ubuntu that is probably the lack of clarity in your relationship with debian. I hear you stood up in debconf'04 and announced your intentions, but nothing about it got posted to the more wide-traffic debian lists, and not everyone went to debconf'04. Also, i must admit that altough i am interested in the technical aspects of ubuntu, i am personally a bit unconfortable about it, as there is no clarity of what is behind it, what the business model of ubuntu is, what is exact relationship to debian is (like you promised to do the right thing and give back to debian, but on the other hand patches from ubuntu employes cannot be attached directly to bug report, but must be links to the ubuntu web site, which makes them less useful), and the question about if ubuntu will canibalize debian in the long run. I don't think all this is really a problem, but there is clearly am uncertainly that you would gain in clarifying. You and everyone involved will only benefit from this. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
