Re: [Rhythmbox-devel] Rhythmbox and our new MP3 plugin

[Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net>]

On Wed, 2006-01-04 at 08:42 +1000, Jonathan Matthew wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 03, 2006 at 01:57:14PM +0100, Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller wrote:
<snip>
> > So I am wondering how the current maintainers and developers feel about
> > adding a clause to the license like the one in Totem -
> > 
> > "The Totem project hereby grant permission for non-gpl compatible GStreamer
> > plugins to be used and distributed together with GStreamer and Totem. This
> > permission are above and beyond the permissions granted by the GPL license
> > Totem is covered by."
> > 
> > In addition to allowing for this MP3 plugin it makes it possible to
> > distribute the Monkeys Audio plugin with Rhythmbox and also the
> > future proprietary plugins of Fluendo (and others)
> 
> As much as I dislike software patents, I recognise that making life
> difficult for users doesn't help.  I'd like the clause to be added.

Same here, and still living in a place where they don't apply...

> > If people are interested/willing to do this I don't mind helping out with
> > mailing former contributors etc., but I know that there might also be some
> > development work needed as one of the former contributors is no longer
> > with us.
> 
> How thorough are we supposed to be in this?  Do contributors of patches
> need to consent, or just people listed in AUTHORS and in copyright
> messages in the source files?

For Totem, we only contacted contributors of non-trivial patches.
Christian drove this, because I was too lazy to do it. I'm pretty sure
that there aren't that many people who contributed this type of patches
to Rhythmbox. The earlier, the easier it would be :)

---
Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net>