Select provider of libav* libraries

[Andreas Cadhalpun]

Hi Bálint,

On 06.06.2015 21:00, Bálint Réczey wrote:
> 2015-06-06 20:10 GMT+02:00 Andreas Cadhalpun <andreas.cadhalpun at googlemail.com>:
>> That's not how I interpret DFSG §1 [1]:
>> "1. Free Redistribution
>> The license of a Debian component may not restrict any party from selling
>> or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software
>> distribution containing programs from several different sources."
>>
>> I think this applies to Debian Live DVDs.
> I'm pretty sure it does not.
> I can create a Live DVD which links some existing GPLv3 packages with
> incompatible packages and this is nat a fault of package maintainters.
> If you believe your interpretation is correct you can ask for
> confirmation on debian-legal.

Maybe, but I don't really look forward to more legal discussions.
(One reason to avoid the libavcodec-extra flavor.)
Would you be willing to ask debian-legal for clarification?

>>> Would it be hard to patch the build system?
>>
>> It'd probably be doable, but there are also other downsides like e.g.
>> a doubled build-time.
> I'm OK with doubled build-time, but I hoped we would need only doubled
> link-time.

I think the implementation in the current libav package doubles the
build-time, though technically that should not be necessary.

On 06.06.2015 21:14, Bálint Réczey wrote:
> 2015-06-06 21:05 GMT+02:00 Andreas Cadhalpun <andreas.cadhalpun at googlemail.com>:
>> Not having the libavcodec-extra flavor is not only a regression
>> (having no AMR encoder), but also an improvement (simpler debian/rules,
>> no license incompatibility to worry about, faster build, ...).
>> I happen to think the improvement factor is bigger than the regression
>> factor, but others may disagree.
> IMO there is a big problem in this reasoning. Our primary focus should
> be our users' needs and non of them would perceive any of the
> advantages directly, only the missing encoder. :-(

If there is actually a legal problem with the libavcodec-extra flavor
and GPLv2-only programs, our users would benefit from the reduced legal risk.

But if we would get confirmation from debian-legal that the libavcodec-extra
package as currently implemented in src:libav is not a problem I'd be much
less opposed to having the extra flavor.

Maybe we could even find a reasonable way to implement this in a dh7-style
debian/rules file without doubling the build-time.

Best regards,
Andreas