lame in new queue

[Hans-Christoph Steiner]

On Nov 11, 2010, at 8:12 PM, Andres Mejia wrote:

> On Thursday 11 November 2010 19:05:51 Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>> Anyone know the story behind the 'lame' package in the NEW queue?  
>> will
>> it get included? did the patent stuff change?  I'd like to package  
>> some
>> stuff that depends on it.
>
> I haven't heard anything new related to lame. There's only the issue  
> with
> inconsistency as far as what license terms lame is distributed  
> under. All
> sources have standard LGPL header. A file named 'LICENSE' says lame  
> is under
> LGPL. There is, however, a README file that includes 2 extra terms  
> on top of
> the LGPL.
>
> Other than that, packages in the NEW queue are getting low priority  
> anyway
> because of work underway to deliver a new release of Debian.


So is there no longer a patent issue with LAME?  I ask because there  
are some Pd libraries that use LAME and it would be nice to have them  
in Debian.

.hc


----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Looking at things from a more basic level, you can come up with a more  
direct solution... It may sound small in theory, but it in practice,  
it can change entire economies.     - Amy Smith