I think this guy [1] can help us and create packages for hal (all hal or just the library) so Flash could depend on it. I think there is no harm if we keep a package just for Flash DRM. But we just need to maintain that until Flash is discontinued.
[1] https://launchpad.net/~mjblenner 2015-10-19 15:31 GMT-02:00 Bryan Quigley <[email protected]>: > Hi Chris, > > The "do nothing" plan in this case would result in features being > taken away during the primetime* life of the 16.04 LTS. If we > knowingly can't support them for even 2 years (likely more like 1 > year), should the LTS include them at all? > > 1- Minimal option: > Just mention that the support will drop in the release notes, follow > Firefox's lead for alerting users. > Stop installing Flash in the Ubuntu installer > > 2 - Slightly more aggressive than Mozilla: > Turn on click-to-play ahead of Mozilla > > 3- Aggressive option: > Disable NPAPI for 16.04. > > Obviously, we can separate NPAPI vs Flash-NPAPI if we want in the above. > > I would rather users realize they also need Chromium/Chrome in their > environments when they first install 16.04 rather than a random number > of months later. If we don't at least do 1 we're just asking for > trouble, I think doing number 3 for general NPAPI isn't that out of > the question. > >>most sites that use Flash continue to work fine with the exception of things >>like Amazon Video > I'm guessing most users have switched to Google Chrome for them. Many > sites that don't need DRM don't use Flash anymore anyway. > > I'll see if I can get a better answer for Adobe. Obviously EOY 2017 is > very different than February 2017. > > Kind regards, > Bryan > > *First two years, until the next LTS is released. > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 12:18 PM, Chris Coulson > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 12/10/15 20:39, Bryan Quigley wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Mozilla has announced their plan to drop NPAPI support for everything >>> but Flash at the end of 2016[1]. That got me thinking that we might >>> have to drop it sooner than that for 16.04 LTS [2] - which is what >>> happened fro Chromium for 14.04 LTS. Flash (NPAPI Linux) is also >>> possibly going EOL for Firefox in February 2017 which might be good to >>> talk about again as well. >>> >>> We previously talked about Flash and NPAPI last November [3][4]. We >>> didn't believe at the time that Ubuntu alone had the pull to greatly >>> change Flash use, and I don't think that's changed. >>> >>> If we do nothing for 16.04 LTS, then for Firefox: >>> 8 months after released all plugins (aside from flash) stop working >>> 10 months after release Flash is no longer maintained >>> >>> Flash 11.2 has also become less useful thanks to dependencies on hal >>> [5] which is longer in Ubuntu, so many sites just don't work. Also >>> getting them to drop gtk2 should make it easier to maintain Firefox. >>> These are really only relevant if we can get Adobe to commit to >>> support Flash 11.2 for longer. >>> >>> I'm happy to ask upstream if we can have some people from Mozilla join >>> us in a UDS session too, but it makes sense to hash this out a bit >>> here first. >>> >>> Thanks! >>> Bryan >>> >>> [1] >>> https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2015/10/08/npapi-plugins-in-firefox/ >>> [2] >>> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.dev.tech.plugins/sdLQgvG84uM >>> [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZCVuy4ugDc >>> [4] >>> http://pad.ubuntu.com/ep/pad/view/uos-1411-adobe-flash-on-firefoxlinux-eol/4MgjOcm3Oc >>> [5] >>> http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2013/10/fixing-amazon-prime-streaming-drm-protected-flash-13-10?utm_source=feedly >>> >> >> Hi, >> >> I didn't feel that the session last time was all that useful - it >> basically acknowledged that Flash on Linux is going EOL and that there >> isn't much we can do about it. What has changed since then and what sort >> of outcome are you looking for that would make an UOS session worthwhile >> for this? >> >> AFAICT, the outcome at the end of any session will be the same: Mozilla >> will still be planning to drop support for non-Flash NPAPI plugins >> sometime next year, they still won't have any plans to support PPAPI >> plugins, they'll still be investing in Shumway, Adobe will still be >> planning to stop providing updates to Flash 11.2 based on some >> non-public timetable (but we expect it to be sometime in 2017), and we >> will keep distributing Flash 11.2 via the partner archive to all Ubuntu >> releases for as long as it's supported. >> >> I wouldn't expect Adobe to spend time porting a piece of software that >> they've deprecated and are only providing security fixes for to newer >> technologies (eg, gtk3, away from HAL). Speaking as the Firefox >> maintainer, the current plugin really doesn't cause any problems for >> Firefox maintenance at the distro level (there might be some burden >> upstream, but Flash already works fine in gtk3 Firefox). And I think >> you're over-exaggerating the impact of not having DRM support (because >> of the HAL dependency) - most sites that use Flash continue to work fine >> with the exception of things like Amazon Video, which haven't worked out >> of the box on Ubuntu since we dropped HAL from the default install >> (IIRC, sometime around 2010). If there really was a big demand for this, >> we'd have fixed it 5 years ago. I even wrote a wrapper to make it work, >> but there wasn't much interest in it >> (https://code.launchpad.net/~chrisccoulson/+junk/flash-hal-helper). >> >> Regards >> - Chris >> >> -- >> ubuntu-desktop mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop > > -- > ubuntu-desktop mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop -- Marcos Alano ---------------------------------------------- P: Por que este email é tão curto? R: http://five.sentenc.es ---------------------------------------------- -- ubuntu-desktop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop
