[LAU] Is there a newer, better "Jack Rack"?

[Hermann Meyer]

Am 08.11.2015 um 10:13 schrieb Ralf Mardorf:
> Hi Hermann,
>
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 07:24:00 +0100, Hermann Meyer wrote:
>> Am 08.11.2015 um 04:22 schrieb Ralf Mardorf:
>>> On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 03:55:38 +0100, Hermann Meyer wrote:
>>>> Given the licence a other name wouldn't change that fact, as it is
>>>> simply not compatible with the DFSG, regardless how you name it.
>>> "Packages must be placed in non-free, if they are not compliant with
>>> the DFSG", see:
>>>
>>>   
>> This issue is now older then 10 years, . . .
>>   https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/09/msg00268.html
> Several LAU subscribers are aware of it, but it's still politics
> regarding an interpretation of Debian's strict GNU policy, that applies
> double standards.
>
> Non-free provides e.g. the proprietary NVIDIA driver, this is
> absolutely ok. Assumed Linuxsampler's upstream would rename the
> license, and Len asked about this, then it should be possible to
> provide it by non-free too. DFSG isn't required for non-free.
>
> However, much more important is that e.g. Aeolus is available by the
> official repositories, but Aeolus comes with the exception that forks
> are unwanted
>
> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.audio.devel/29966 you most likely
> remember the complete discussion, as Debian maintainers do too ;).

Unwanted, but not forbidden by the chosen license.

> IOW it depends to the Debian maintainers

This is true for any package in debian. First of all a debian maintainer 
needs to take a package over and be responsible for it.


> arbitrary political decision
> and not to a Debian policy.
>
> It's absolutely ok (by Debian's policy and for me too) that Debian
> provides Aeolus, but there's no valid reason to not provide
> Linuxsampler, since Linuxsampler is GPLed too, the GPL is valid, just
> the exception is null and void.

That is just your opinion, . . .

> So were exactly do you see a clear-cut course by the Debian maintainers?

debian maintainers love to work in cooperation with upstream. When 
you've followed the link above, you'll find out that they asked the 
linuxsampler devs, 10 years ago, to fix the license issue, which still 
didn't happen, so, I see a clear-cut indeed.

> A rhetorical question ;), IMO this discussion is much too off-topic.
>
> Back to the topic, Carla e.g. from an Ubuntu PPA or from the Arch user
> repository can be provided with all features, assumed Carla should be
> provided by official Debian/Ubuntu repositories, it will be released
> without all features. This does cause problems for many less
> experienced Linux users, so users writing e.g. Ubuntu help pages and
> Wikis, requires to write howtos for those special distro versions.
>
> I'm an Arch Linux user, but I like to help Linux newcomers, so I prefer
> to provide Ubuntu and Ubuntu Studio support for this purpose. It would
> be nice to make things not that complicated. Other than you and me, a
> lot of computer users aren't geeks interested in computer politics.
> It's already hard for them to understand the meaning of LTS, the
> difference between an Ubuntu flavour and an Ubuntu derivative and how
> secure or insecure the usage of PPAs is, since terms like "dependency"
> or "soname" require a level of understanding, they don't want to have
> to use a user-friendly Linux distro.
>
> Last but not least, fortunately jack rack still is available for the
> current release of Ubuntu :).
>
> Regards,
> Ralf
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-audio-user mailing list
> Linux-audio-user at lists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user