codec buddy, fluendo, etc.

[seth vidal]

On Fri, 2008-02-08 at 14:17 -0500, Max Spevack wrote:
> This email is about several topics at once:
> 
> (1) CodecBuddy was a Board-level decision that was made with the 
> understanding that after it had been in Fedora for a while, we would 
> evaluate the various pros and cons of how it was going and figure out if 
> it should stay in, be removed, or be modified.
> 
> (2) I hear anecdotally that the folks over at Fluendo would enjoy 
> having more open conversations with us about CodecBuddy, and how it 
> could be improved to make the Fedora experience of it better.  These 
> conversations could/should be held in public.
> 
> (3) fedora-devel-list is having some reasonably heated discussions about 
> the precedents set by the CodecBuddy decisions, and how they do (or 
> don't) translate into things like open game engines packaged into Fedora 
> which have the ability to download levels or data that are closed 
> source, versus open game engines in Fedora that download levels or data 
> that are also open.
> 
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-February/msg00476.html
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-February/msg00365.html
> 
> (4) One of the things that Board has recently said is that it would like 
> to start having a public meeting once a month to address some of the 
> issues that are getting play in various parts of our community.
> 
> I think we have an opportunity here to address all 4 of these topics at 
> once, in one or more IRC conversations.
> 
> Specific questions to be answered:
> 
> 0.  Invite the Fluendo folks to join.

This is a bad idea and it looks like collusion. 


> 1.  What is good about Codec Buddy?
It puts us into a precarious political and ethical situation. So I see
very little good from it at this point.

> 2.  What improvements would we like to see in Codec Buddy and/or 
> codeina?

I think we probably need to consider removing it.

> 3.  Are there any license, legal, or "open source morality" concerns 
> that need to be addressed?

Yes, All of the above. Not only that but it makes it harder for us to
take a stand on other issues. Like googleearth, for example.

-sv