From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ptmx.org (ptmx.org [178.63.28.110]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C607714A0 for ; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 22:48:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.178.14] (chello062178118086.5.14.vie.surfer.at [62.178.118.86]) by ptmx.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A9BED2874B for ; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 00:48:02 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <5418BE22.9050300@pseudoterminal.org> Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 00:48:02 +0200 From: Carlos Rafael Giani User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: <5417FED2.1030106@pseudoterminal.org> <20140916213343.GW2480@denix.org> In-Reply-To: <20140916213343.GW2480@denix.org> Subject: Re: mpg123 recipe LICENSE_FLAGS = "commercial" issue X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 22:48:05 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 2014-09-16 23:33, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote: > On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 11:11:46AM +0200, Carlos Rafael Giani wrote: >> On 2014-09-16 07:43, Khem Raj wrote: >>> Hi Carlos/All >>> >>> I want to understand why LICENSE_FLAGS = "commercial" was added to >>> >>> meta-multimedia/recipes-multimedia/mpg123/mpg123_1.15.3.bb >>> >>> in initial commit and has been carried over upgrades ever since >>> >>> The license seems to be LGPL 2.0 and is explained in greater detail here >>> >>> http://mpg123.org/cgi-bin/scm/mpg123/trunk/doc/ROAD_TO_LGPL?revision=2607 >>> >>> So what portions of it are having different terms for commercial distribution ? >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> -Khem >> It's because MPEG audio is subject to royalties. This is also the >> reason why gst-plugins-ugly and gstreamer1.0-plugins-ugly have this >> flag. > But does gst-plugins-ugly provide own codecs? It's mostly a collection of > external plugins, so it shouldn't itself be marked as "commercial": > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.handhelds.openembedded.core/51055 > But the whole point of gst-plugins-ugly is to be a collection of tested high-quality plugins for formats and standards which are subject to royalties. Tested quality plugins without the royalty go to -good.