9:15 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 6:04 PM, Valent Turkovic
<valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
fyi
http://www.ubuntu-trading.com/
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
there is one interesting graph about fedora and ubuntu:
http://www.google.com/trends?q=fedora%2C+ubuntu
i'm talking with around 10 people "what feature in ubuntu better than
similar in fedora". most of them told me: "one click install for
codecs, nvidia drivers, etc".
9:23 a.m.
Zhukov Pavel wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 6:04 PM, Valent Turkovic
<valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> fyi
>
> http://www.ubuntu-trading.com/
>
> --
> Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
> Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
>
there is one interesting graph about fedora and ubuntu:
http://www.google.com/trends?q=fedora%2C+ubuntu
i'm talking with around 10 people "what feature in ubuntu better than
similar in fedora". most of them told me: "one click install for
codecs, nvidia drivers, etc".
... which Fedora is never going to support.
Rahul
9:22 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 6:23 PM, Rahul Sundaram
<sundaram(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
Zhukov Pavel wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 6:04 PM, Valent Turkovic
> <valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> fyi
>>
>> http://www.ubuntu-trading.com/
>>
>> --
>> Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
>> Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
>>
>
> there is one interesting graph about fedora and ubuntu:
> http://www.google.com/trends?q=fedora%2C+ubuntu
>
> i'm talking with around 10 people "what feature in ubuntu better than
> similar in fedora". most of them told me: "one click install for
> codecs, nvidia drivers, etc".
... which Fedora is never going to support.
Rahul
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
why we can't add feature like "one click rpmfusion/livna enable" with
message like "caution! non free software"
9:50 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 10:22 AM, Zhukov Pavel <gelios(a)gmail.com> wrote:
why we can't add feature like "one click rpmfusion/livna
enable" with
message like "caution! non free software"
Because that would be contributory infringement. We have actual
knowledge that there is software there that is illegal to download in
the US. We do have codeina/codec-buddy, which offers the opportunity
to download a gratis MP3 plugin and purchase option for various other
encumbered codecs. Fedora, it's main sponsor being a US company, is
compelled to abide by US law (no matter that we may not agree with
them).
There's been quite the debate whether this is the Right Thing(TM) to
do. Let's take a step back here, and look at this not from the
perspective of philosophy and our ideals (while those *are*
important), but rather from the perspective of the user. I click on
some piece of media on my NTFS partition that works just fine under
Windows, and all of a sudden in Linux, it doesn't work anymore! No
explanation of why not, simply that "you don't have <x>". Well why
not? How do I get what is required? That is where codeina comes in
and does an excellent job. It tells you that you are using a non-free
format, why that is bad, and what recourse you have if the media is
available in no other formats (buy the Fluendo stuff).
While I am kinda on the fence about using Fedora as an advertising
platform, is it the right thing to do from a *user experience*
perspective? Absolutely. And isn't that what we're all about?
Without users, we wouldn't be where we are today.
11:27 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 6:50 PM, Jon Stanley <jonstanley(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 10:22 AM, Zhukov Pavel
<gelios(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> why we can't add feature like "one click rpmfusion/livna enable"
with
> message like "caution! non free software"
Because that would be contributory infringement. We have actual
knowledge that there is software there that is illegal to download in
the US. We do have codeina/codec-buddy, which offers the opportunity
to download a gratis MP3 plugin and purchase option for various other
encumbered codecs. Fedora, it's main sponsor being a US company, is
compelled to abide by US law (no matter that we may not agree with
them).
There's been quite the debate whether this is the Right Thing(TM) to
do. Let's take a step back here, and look at this not from the
perspective of philosophy and our ideals (while those *are*
important), but rather from the perspective of the user. I click on
some piece of media on my NTFS partition that works just fine under
Windows, and all of a sudden in Linux, it doesn't work anymore! No
explanation of why not, simply that "you don't have <x>". Well why
not? How do I get what is required? That is where codeina comes in
and does an excellent job. It tells you that you are using a non-free
format, why that is bad, and what recourse you have if the media is
available in no other formats (buy the Fluendo stuff).
While I am kinda on the fence about using Fedora as an advertising
platform, is it the right thing to do from a *user experience*
perspective? Absolutely. And isn't that what we're all about?
Without users, we wouldn't be where we are today.
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
i'm talking not about codecs only. i'm talking about nvidia/ati
drivers and other stuff that CAN be downloaded free in any country but
not uses GPL.
11:44 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Zhukov Pavel <gelios(a)gmail.com> wrote:
i'm talking not about codecs only. i'm talking about
nvidia/ati
drivers and other stuff that CAN be downloaded free in any country but
not uses GPL.
You can read about Fedora's take on these types of items on this wiki page:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ForbiddenItems
That page addresses Nvidia and ATI drivers as well as several other items.
~Jeffrey
11:58 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 8:44 PM, Jeffrey Tadlock <linux(a)elfshadow.net> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Zhukov Pavel
<gelios(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> i'm talking not about codecs only. i'm talking about nvidia/ati
> drivers and other stuff that CAN be downloaded free in any country but
> not uses GPL.
You can read about Fedora's take on these types of items on this wiki page:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ForbiddenItems
That page addresses Nvidia and ATI drivers as well as several other items.
~Jeffrey
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
Yes. but can fedora have "one click enable" repository with this
stuff? Only if user want it, and warned about license.
1:07 p.m.
On 02/22/2008 12:58 PM, Zhukov Pavel wrote:
Yes. but can fedora have "one click enable" repository with
this
stuff? Only if user want it, and warned about license.
No. We can't distribute it nor point to others that do. It's called
"aiding and abetting". Not only is prostitution illegal; pimping
prostitutes is illegal too.
1:10 p.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 10:07 PM, Christopher Aillon <caillon(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 02/22/2008 12:58 PM, Zhukov Pavel wrote:
> Yes. but can fedora have "one click enable" repository with this
> stuff? Only if user want it, and warned about license.
No. We can't distribute it nor point to others that do. It's called
"aiding and abetting". Not only is prostitution illegal; pimping
prostitutes is illegal too.
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
downloading and installing Nvidia drivers illegal in US? O_o
1:17 p.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 1:10 PM, Zhukov Pavel <gelios(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 10:07 PM, Christopher Aillon
<caillon(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
> On 02/22/2008 12:58 PM, Zhukov Pavel wrote:
downloading and installing Nvidia drivers illegal in US? O_o
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
Nah, but they're closed sourced, which means that they won't be packaged
with Fedora.
--
Ing. Juan M. Rodriguez Moreno
Desarrollador de Sistemas Abiertos
Sitio: www.isocron.net [En Construcción]
1:28 p.m.
2008/2/22 Juan Rodriguez <nushio(a)fedoraproject.org>:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 1:10 PM, Zhukov Pavel
<gelios(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 10:07 PM, Christopher Aillon <caillon(a)redhat.com>
wrote:
> > On 02/22/2008 12:58 PM, Zhukov Pavel wrote:
>
> downloading and installing Nvidia drivers illegal in US? O_o
>
>
>
>
> --
> Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
> Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
>
Nah, but they're closed sourced, which means that they won't be packaged
with Fedora.
--
Ing. Juan M. Rodriguez Moreno
Desarrollador de Sistemas Abiertos
Sitio: www.isocron.net [En Construcción]
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
"Can't be packaged with fedora" doesn't mean that "it can be easy
available for fedora user". For example, i don't think that "one click
enable adobe repository with flash-plugin" system violates fedora
spirit.
1:40 p.m.
How did a thread starting out with the topic of "Ubuntu Cola, UK's
first Freetrade Cola", end up a discussion of closed source drivers?
My two cents...
Best Regards,
John Babich
FP Volunteer and Cola Drinker, but Abstainer from Closed-source Drivers
3:08 p.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 8:28 PM, Zhukov Pavel <gelios(a)gmail.com> wrote:
2008/2/22 Juan Rodriguez <nushio(a)fedoraproject.org>:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 1:10 PM, Zhukov Pavel <gelios(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 10:07 PM, Christopher Aillon
<caillon(a)redhat.com>
> wrote:
> > > On 02/22/2008 12:58 PM, Zhukov Pavel wrote:
> >
> > downloading and installing Nvidia drivers illegal in US? O_o
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
> > Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
> >
>
> Nah, but they're closed sourced, which means that they won't be packaged
> with Fedora.
>
> --
> Ing. Juan M. Rodriguez Moreno
> Desarrollador de Sistemas Abiertos
> Sitio: www.isocron.net [En Construcción]
> --
> Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
> Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
>
"Can't be packaged with fedora" doesn't mean that "it can be
easy
available for fedora user". For example, i don't think that "one click
enable adobe repository with flash-plugin" system violates fedora
spirit.
My point exactly!
If I can steal your attention for the moment and point you to these two bugs;
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=236881
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=416396
I have suggested an way to "easy flash player install" as a fix for
this but it is not getting any attention. To me it looks like there is
no will for this to be fixed/usable for general users... instead they
are "forced" to google and ask around how to get the basic
functionality like watching youtube videos (or FedoraTV) on Fedora
Desktop... I believe this should JustWork or as close to it as
possible.
This is the idea:
Can there be a script on Fedora desktop that says something like this:
"Install Flash Player" that enables adobe yum repository, presents the
licence and if users agree goes
out and install the flash plugin.
Valent
--
http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/
linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless
registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org.
ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic
3:30 p.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Valent Turkovic
<valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
This is the idea:
Can there be a script on Fedora desktop that says something like this:
"Install Flash Player" that enables adobe yum repository, presents the
licence and if users agree goes
out and install the flash plugin.
I will not support that. In fact I will actively lobby against
including a Fedora specific enhancement that directs people to
proprietary executable code.
-jef
3:38 p.m.
On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 12:30 AM, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Valent Turkovic
<valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> This is the idea:
> Can there be a script on Fedora desktop that says something like this:
> "Install Flash Player" that enables adobe yum repository, presents the
> licence and if users agree goes
> out and install the flash plugin.
I will not support that. In fact I will actively lobby against
including a Fedora specific enhancement that directs people to
proprietary executable code.
-jef
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
Then fedora will continue loose people that doesn't like "google right
after install". That's most of newbie linux users. Is this correct
marketing decision?
4:11 p.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 12:38 PM, Zhukov Pavel <gelios(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Then fedora will continue loose people that doesn't like
"google right
after install". That's most of newbie linux users. Is this correct
marketing decision?
It's a principled marketing decision...and one I will continue to support.
The purpose of this project is to advance open source innovation.. it
is not to collect users like they are pogs.
We don't do that by prefering to expose users to the more capable and
legal but closed source versions of any technology over the less
capable or illegal open versions. Flash and multimedia is no
exception. If the open flash that we can distribute sucks...then we
find a way to fix it..and fix it legally. Open development happens
faster exactly because developers and users are in more direct contact
than traditional closed development. We undercut the engine of open
development by preferring to show users closed software over open
software. In this sense, ESR and myself are on opposite ends of
thought on how to deal with the problems of multimedia. If you don't
agree with me, you might also find that the freespire is more to your
liking.
We can not hide from the fact the the legal issues surrounding patents
and multimedia is a huge mess. It won't get better unless we face it
head on and deal with it.
Running off to a small island somewhere where software patents and
incorporating there isn't going to help fix the problem. We fix the
problem by standing here, and telling everyone that this patent crap
is fundamentally hurting open innovation. We fix the problem by
standing here and reminding people that Europe is not immune to this
threat. It's real damn easy to pretend the problem is just a US
issue...its not. Its a looming legal issue everywhere. We don't win
long term by ignoring it. We'll have this same discussion every
single release cycle.. and I'm okay with that. Patents are the biggest
problem facing the open source ecosystem, and I'd rather have Fedora
stand here and be a beacon for rational, passionate, discussion on the
issue, than to just side step the issue for the sake of collecting a
few more users in our userbase.
I do not need to beat another linux distribution in terms of users for
Fedora to achieve is core goals of fostering open innovation.
I need 'enough' users... i need 'enough' upstream developers.. i need
'enough' maintainers.. I need 'enough' triagers... I need
'enough'
artists... I need 'enough writers...I need 'enough' translators....
and give them 'enough' open infrastructure by which to communicate as
partners in the process of open innovation.
What I don't need is proprietary software.
I don't need to be greedy for Fedora to reach its prime objectives. I
am perfectly okay with other distribution existing and being popular.
The future of ALL linux distributions runs through what is happening
as part of Fedora...and I'm perfectly happy with that.
-jef
1:26 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 11:11 PM, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 12:38 PM, Zhukov Pavel
<gelios(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Then fedora will continue loose people that doesn't like "google right
> after install". That's most of newbie linux users. Is this correct
> marketing decision?
It's a principled marketing decision...and one I will continue to support.
The purpose of this project is to advance open source innovation.. it
is not to collect users like they are pogs.
We don't do that by prefering to expose users to the more capable and
legal but closed source versions of any technology over the less
capable or illegal open versions.
This makes no sense to me. All I saw until not from fedora project is
that legal comes first...
Then how come fedora supports closed source fluendo codecs and doesn't
prefer US illegal codecs via livna or other repositories?
Flash and multimedia is no
exception. If the open flash that we can distribute sucks...then we
find a way to fix it..and fix it legally.
And now you say this needs to be fixed legally?!? Are you confused or am only I?
Please clear this up, you got me really confused right now.
AFAIK there is no legal and/or free way of making flash work via
swf-dec project if that is what you are implying.
Open development happens
faster exactly because developers and users are in more direct contact
than traditional closed development. We undercut the engine of open
development by preferring to show users closed software over open
software.
You talking too general, please don't generalize this issue with
classic open vs. closed source debate. I know the benefits of open
source solutions and I really support them, but I don't see any open
source solution right now that makes users able to use flash video
online. Currently swf-dec works ONLY with youtube.com (most of other
sites don't work) and ONLY after you install illegal codecs!
I'll be happy to work out the quirks with swf-dec people but until
most of sites work don't force them to use this. Let's get enough
advanced users aware of swf-dec and later make the switch to open
solution later - but first let's make it first so that it doesn't
suck this hard.
In this sense, ESR and myself are on opposite ends of
thought on how to deal with the problems of multimedia. If you don't
agree with me, you might also find that the freespire is more to your
liking.
We don't agree but about different things that you suggest here, and
no, freespire is not more to my liking.
We can not hide from the fact the the legal issues surrounding
patents
and multimedia is a huge mess. It won't get better unless we face it
head on and deal with it.
How do you deal with it? You just don't use them, that is not dealing
with them. Or are you talking about codeina?
Running off to a small island somewhere where software patents and
incorporating there isn't going to help fix the problem.
Maybe not for US and parts of Europe, but for the rest of the world it would...
We fix the
problem by standing here, and telling everyone that this patent crap
is fundamentally hurting open innovation. We fix the problem by
standing here and reminding people that Europe is not immune to this
threat. It's real damn easy to pretend the problem is just a US
issue...its not. Its a looming legal issue everywhere. We don't win
long term by ignoring it. We'll have this same discussion every
single release cycle.. and I'm okay with that. Patents are the biggest
problem facing the open source ecosystem, and I'd rather have Fedora
stand here and be a beacon for rational, passionate, discussion on the
issue, than to just side step the issue for the sake of collecting a
few more users in our userbase.
Ok, I understand that, I have heard it dozen of times since I joined
mailing lists, but if users agree with adobe licence there are no
patent violations for fedora or red hat. right?
I do not need to beat another linux distribution in terms of users
for
Fedora to achieve is core goals of fostering open innovation.
I need 'enough' users... i need 'enough' upstream developers.. i need
'enough' maintainers.. I need 'enough' triagers... I need
'enough'
artists... I need 'enough writers...I need 'enough' translators....
and give them 'enough' open infrastructure by which to communicate as
partners in the process of open innovation.
What I don't need is proprietary software.
People need things to JustWork, and flash video is really high on that
list, you need to accept and aknowledge that. We all would be really
happy if swf-dec would work and legally on fedora, but it doesn't. We
would be happy if adobe opensorced their player and let go of its
patents, but they don't...
Valent.
--
http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/
linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless
registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org.
ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic
2:10 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 10:26 PM, Valent Turkovic
<valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Flash and multimedia is no
> exception. If the open flash that we can distribute sucks...then we
> find a way to fix it..and fix it legally.
And now you say this needs to be fixed legally?!? Are you confused or am only I?
Please clear this up, you got me really confused right now.
AFAIK there is no legal and/or free way of making flash work via
swf-dec project if that is what you are implying.
I never said that there are easy solutions to the problem. If easy
solutions existed...we'd be making use of them. It must be open and
it must be legal. I never said that a solution currently exists which
satisfies both conditions. But if fluendo can make an open source
legal mp3 binary available, surely work can be done to make other open
source but legally obtainable binaries available for other codecs
(even if they cost money to get). How long did it take for an entity
like fluendo to make a legal and open source mp3 implementation
available? 4 years or more since Red Hat dropped support for mp3
decoding (I forget exactly when rhl drop mp3 playback, it was
pre-fedora). Hopefully it won't take another 4 years for them to be
able to provide further open codecs..even if they a non-zero cost to
users.
You talking too general, please don't generalize this issue
with
classic open vs. closed source debate. I know the benefits of open
source solutions and I really support them, but I don't see any open
source solution right now that makes users able to use flash video
online. Currently swf-dec works ONLY with youtube.com (most of other
sites don't work) and ONLY after you install illegal codecs!
Life's tough. The legal burden of software patents is a bitter pill.
The world is going to come to an end when the first software patents
get upheld in court in the EU.
I'll be happy to work out the quirks with swf-dec people but
until
most of sites work don't force them to use this. Let's get enough
advanced users aware of swf-dec and later make the switch to open
solution later - but first let's make it first so that it doesn't
suck this hard.
In a word, no. We will continue to suck, until people feel compelled
enough to find a solution we can live with. Open and legal..those are
the rules.
Ok, I understand that, I have heard it dozen of times since I
joined
mailing lists, but if users agree with adobe licence there are no
patent violations for fedora or red hat. right?
You are perfectly free as a user to install adobe's stuff. Fedora as a
project isn't going to go out of its way to make using proprietary
software easy. It just isn't.
People need things to JustWork, and flash video is really high on
that
list, you need to accept and aknowledge that.
I accept and acknowledge that people have a need for all sorts of
proprietary software. I personally have a need for Labview, IDL and
Picasa.. I don't expect Fedora to cater to my needs. just as I
wouldn't expect Fedora to cater to the needs for Adobe flash. The
relative popularity of Adobe flash compared to that of Picasa doesn't
change the issue of proprietariness that makes Adobe's software
inappropriate to prefer inside of Fedora controlled space.
A year from now it won't matter, MS's Silverlight with crush the life
out of Adobe and they will be forced to open source their stuff in a
last ditch effort to keep from being crushed.
We all would be really
happy if swf-dec would work and legally on fedora, but it doesn't. We
would be happy if adobe opensorced their player and let go of its
patents, but they don't...
I'd be happy if we all just went back to using gopher servers and
watching ascii animations.
-jef
6:36 a.m.
On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 11:10 AM, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 10:26 PM, Valent Turkovic
<valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > Flash and multimedia is no
> > exception. If the open flash that we can distribute sucks...then we
> > find a way to fix it..and fix it legally.
>
> And now you say this needs to be fixed legally?!? Are you confused or am only I?
> Please clear this up, you got me really confused right now.
> AFAIK there is no legal and/or free way of making flash work via
> swf-dec project if that is what you are implying.
I never said that there are easy solutions to the problem. If easy
solutions existed...we'd be making use of them. It must be open and
it must be legal. I never said that a solution currently exists which
satisfies both conditions. But if fluendo can make an open source
legal mp3 binary available, surely work can be done to make other open
source but legally obtainable binaries available for other codecs
(even if they cost money to get). How long did it take for an entity
like fluendo to make a legal and open source mp3 implementation
available? 4 years or more since Red Hat dropped support for mp3
decoding (I forget exactly when rhl drop mp3 playback, it was
pre-fedora). Hopefully it won't take another 4 years for them to be
able to provide further open codecs..even if they a non-zero cost to
users.
> You talking too general, please don't generalize this issue with
> classic open vs. closed source debate. I know the benefits of open
> source solutions and I really support them, but I don't see any open
> source solution right now that makes users able to use flash video
> online. Currently swf-dec works ONLY with youtube.com (most of other
> sites don't work) and ONLY after you install illegal codecs!
Life's tough. The legal burden of software patents is a bitter pill.
The world is going to come to an end when the first software patents
get upheld in court in the EU.
> I'll be happy to work out the quirks with swf-dec people but until
> most of sites work don't force them to use this. Let's get enough
> advanced users aware of swf-dec and later make the switch to open
> solution later - but first let's make it first so that it doesn't
> suck this hard.
In a word, no. We will continue to suck, until people feel compelled
enough to find a solution we can live with. Open and legal..those are
the rules.
> Ok, I understand that, I have heard it dozen of times since I joined
> mailing lists, but if users agree with adobe licence there are no
> patent violations for fedora or red hat. right?
You are perfectly free as a user to install adobe's stuff. Fedora as a
project isn't going to go out of its way to make using proprietary
software easy. It just isn't.
> People need things to JustWork, and flash video is really high on that
> list, you need to accept and aknowledge that.
I accept and acknowledge that people have a need for all sorts of
proprietary software. I personally have a need for Labview, IDL and
Picasa.. I don't expect Fedora to cater to my needs. just as I
wouldn't expect Fedora to cater to the needs for Adobe flash. The
relative popularity of Adobe flash compared to that of Picasa doesn't
change the issue of proprietariness that makes Adobe's software
inappropriate to prefer inside of Fedora controlled space.
A year from now it won't matter, MS's Silverlight with crush the life
out of Adobe and they will be forced to open source their stuff in a
last ditch effort to keep from being crushed.
> We all would be really
> happy if swf-dec would work and legally on fedora, but it doesn't. We
> would be happy if adobe opensorced their player and let go of its
> patents, but they don't...
I'd be happy if we all just went back to using gopher servers and
watching ascii animations.
-jef
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
we HAVE system to BUY codecs with "one click".
we HAVE NO system to download FREE proprietary software such as
drivers and flash with "one click".
Nvidia and Ati cards is most powerful cards now. I have intel GMA with
free drivers and i can't play games or use compiz if my resolution
more than 2048. Is this correct to limit people freedom which hardware
they can use?
P.S.: Proprietary software isn't bad of evil. Fedora is free - this
mean people can choose to use proprietary software.
6:52 a.m.
Zhukov Pavel wrote:
Nvidia and Ati cards is most powerful cards now. I have intel GMA with
free drivers and i can't play games or use compiz if my resolution
more than 2048. Is this correct to limit people freedom which hardware
they can use?
P.S.: Proprietary software isn't bad of evil. Fedora is free - this
mean people can choose to use proprietary software.
Read again http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives.
Intel has open drivers with full documentation. ATI is followup fairly
fast. Nvidia is the odd man out here. Besides many kernel developers
consider proprietary kernel modules a violation of the GPL license. We
shouldn't and needn't take such risks for binary blobs that we can't
debug or fix issues.
Rahul
9:52 a.m.
On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 7:52 AM, Rahul Sundaram
<sundaram(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
Intel has open drivers with full documentation. ATI is followup
fairly
fast. Nvidia is the odd man out here. Besides many kernel developers
consider proprietary kernel modules a violation of the GPL license. We
shouldn't and needn't take such risks for binary blobs that we can't
debug or fix issues.
This is why I support Fedora's policy of not including binary kernel
drivers. I've always felt they must be a GPL violation. I just don't
have the legal background to speak with any authority on the subject.
Having said that I do actually use the binary drivers. When the
hardware you get at work comes with one of those cards you do what you
have to. :-( One of the things I don't understand about Windows
users complaining about finding and installing these drivers on Linux
is the simple fact that they have to do the same thing on Windows.
Every install of Windows I've ever done involves half a day or more
looking for and installing drivers. On Linux I've only got a handful
to worry about. Every thing else just works.
What I do wish Fedora had was a better way to explain why things
didn't work interactively. For instance when a user attempted to
access a NTFS partition a warning stating that there are patent issues
preventing support of NTFS partitions in Fedora for legal reasons, and
a link to more information, codeina style. I don't have a problem
with linking to fluendo as long as we link to any other available
legal solutions as well. Nothing motivates people to take action like
a hit to their pocket book.
Russell
10:08 a.m.
Russell Harrison wrote:
What I do wish Fedora had was a better way to explain why things
didn't work interactively. For instance when a user attempted to
access a NTFS partition a warning stating that there are patent issues
preventing support of NTFS partitions in Fedora for legal reasons, and
a link to more information, codeina style. I don't have a problem
with linking to fluendo as long as we link to any other available
legal solutions as well. Nothing motivates people to take action like
a hit to their pocket book.
Ahem. Seems you haven't gotten the memo on NTFS
# yum info ntfs-3g
Installed Packages
Name : ntfs-3g
Arch : i386
Epoch : 2
Version: 1.1120
Release: 1.fc8
Size : 288 k
Repo : installed
Summary: Linux NTFS userspace driver
Description:
The ntfs-3g driver is an open source, GPL licensed, third generation
Linux NTFS driver. It provides full read-write access to NTFS, excluding
access to encrypted files, writing compressed files, changing file
ownership, access right.
Technically it’s based on and a major improvement to the third
generation Linux NTFS driver, ntfsmount. The improvements include
functionality, quality and performance enhancements.
ntfs-3g features are being merged to ntfsmount. In the meanwhile,
ntfs-3g is currently the only free, as in either speech or beer, NTFS
driver for Linux that supports unlimited file creation and deletion.
----
Rahul
7:55 p.m.
On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 11:08 AM, Rahul Sundaram
<sundaram(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
Ahem. Seems you haven't gotten the memo on NTFS
# yum info ntfs-3g
...
I was just using it as an example since someone else mentioned it
earlier in the thread. I gave up dual booting my machines a long time
ago. Not because it didn't work, it was just using up space on my
hard drive. ;-) Glad to hear the project has gotten stable enough to
be reliable. Last I looked at it (quite some time ago) they were
still saying write access could possibly require the sacrifice of a
small animal. Thanks for the heads up.
Russell
5:53 a.m.
Russell Harrison <rtlm10 <at> gmail.com> writes:
On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 11:08 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Ahem. Seems you haven't gotten the memo on NTFS
>
> # yum info ntfs-3g
...
Last I looked at it (quite some time ago) they were still
saying write access could possibly require the sacrifice of
a small animal.
Well, to be more specific, a Vista compatible full implementation
would take over 110 persons-years, cost over $20 million and the
size is almost like all the 60 in-kernel Linux file systems
altogether, or 9,000 printed pages preferably without any logic
error anywhere.
Naturally everybody expects this file sytem to perform as well,
as any Linux native file system but while the latter ones are
developed by dozens of coders paid by multi-billion and multi-milion
companies, the former one is a tiny community effort, with some
extraterrestrial help.
I hope this explains the issue somewhat better ;-)
Szaka
--
NTFS-3G: http://ntfs-3g.org
2:49 p.m.
On Sat, 2008-02-23 at 08:26 +0100, Valent Turkovic wrote:
People need things to JustWork, and flash video is really high on
that
list ...
If "Install missing plugin" in Firefox doesn't work, something is buggy,
and it ain't Fedora.
- Karsten
--
Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr.
Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com
Fedora : http://quaid.fedorapeople.org
gpg key : AD0E0C41
3:40 p.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 10:30 PM, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Valent Turkovic
<valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> This is the idea:
> Can there be a script on Fedora desktop that says something like this:
> "Install Flash Player" that enables adobe yum repository, presents the
> licence and if users agree goes
> out and install the flash plugin.
I will not support that. In fact I will actively lobby against
including a Fedora specific enhancement that directs people to
proprietary executable code.
-jef
Okay. And you actually belive that people won't install this just the
same but will be "pissed" that it is not easy to do it but they need
to "jump through hoops" and there are legal ways to do this. Plus we
have selinux on by default to protect from badly behaving programs -
closed source and open source alike. Other distributions don't have
selinux installed so that is an extra layer of protection for security
of fedora users...
Plus if you look at reviews of linux distributions most of them have a
category "How easy is it to go to youtube and watch videos" because
that is what desktop users do and expect from any desktop.
Valent.
--
http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/
linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless
registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org.
ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic
3:48 p.m.
Okay. And you actually belive that people won't install this
just the
same but will be "pissed" that it is not easy to do it but they need
to "jump through hoops" and there are legal ways to do this. Plus we
have selinux on by default to protect from badly behaving programs -
closed source and open source alike. Other distributions don't have
selinux installed so that is an extra layer of protection for security
of fedora users...
Plus if you look at reviews of linux distributions most of them have a
category "How easy is it to go to youtube and watch videos" because
that is what desktop users do and expect from any desktop.
The question you should be asking is: is this Fedora's target audience?!
Fedora intends to provide a FREE system that show cases the latest and
greatest in FREE software. Providing proprietary software is clearly
not in line with this mission and so Fedora isn't going to do this.
After all, we'd rather change the world than go along with it :)
Now perhaps, unless you think you can come up with a better way to
make Fedora's mission clear to everyone else, or I've been entirely
mistaken, perhaps we could end this thread?
Best,
Jon
12:34 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 10:48 PM, Jonathan Roberts
<jonathan.roberts.uk(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
> Okay. And you actually belive that people won't install
this just the
> same but will be "pissed" that it is not easy to do it but they need
> to "jump through hoops" and there are legal ways to do this. Plus we
> have selinux on by default to protect from badly behaving programs -
> closed source and open source alike. Other distributions don't have
> selinux installed so that is an extra layer of protection for security
> of fedora users...
>
> Plus if you look at reviews of linux distributions most of them have a
> category "How easy is it to go to youtube and watch videos" because
> that is what desktop users do and expect from any desktop.
The question you should be asking is: is this Fedora's target audience?!
Fedora intends to provide a FREE system that show cases the latest and
greatest in FREE software. Providing proprietary software is clearly
not in line with this mission and so Fedora isn't going to do this.
After all, we'd rather change the world than go along with it :)
Now perhaps, unless you think you can come up with a better way to
make Fedora's mission clear to everyone else, or I've been entirely
mistaken, perhaps we could end this thread?
Best,
Jon
You are not making sense to me because fluendo codecs are also not
free as in speech and also not free as in beer (except mp3 codec) and
we still "support" them. Why not give the same level of support to
flash which. Fedora is not made any less free by leting people use the
tools then need for their desktop.
You are implying that most of the fedora users aren't using flash from
adobe on their desktops. Please go and talk to people and you will see
that you are wrong. I don't have hard evidence but I would bet that
most of fedora users have installed flash player from adobe, but just
don't have a easy way of doing it...
This idea about a script is not that radical. You tell why running
closed souce players is bad, as we currently do with explaining why
non open codecs are bad with codeina, and then IF users decide setup a
yum repository from adobe.
Valent.
--
http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/
linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless
registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org.
ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic
1:25 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Valent Turkovic
<valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
You are not making sense to me because fluendo codecs are also not
free as in speech and also not free as in beer (except mp3 codec) and
we still "support" them.
I believe that general discussion around this topic as resulted in a
consensous that codeina as we ship it needs let us be more fine
grained than the first implementation allowed. If we include it again
in F9 we will most likely not be presenting any of the proprietary
codecs in the default listing if we can help it. We might still send
people to fluendo's webshop for the mp3 codec and they might see other
codecs there, but I very much doubt the codeina in F9 will identify
fluendo as a vendor for any codec other than the mp3 codec by default.
Codeina was and is an experiment. We are fine tuning how we use the
on-demand codec identification technology.
You are implying that most of the fedora users aren't using
flash from
adobe on their desktops.
I'm not implying that.
I DO NOT CARE WHAT MOST PEOPLE USE IN TERMS OF PROPRIETARY SOFTWARE
I know people use proprietary software... I even use it when I need
to. But I'm not going to work very hard, harder than you, to make sure
Fedora doesn't point people to proprietary software out of the box.
Please go and talk to people and you will see
that you are wrong. I don't have hard evidence but I would bet that
most of fedora users have installed flash player from adobe, but just
don't have a easy way of doing it...
It was easy enough for me. Again... your solution is to find a way to
encourage the firefox people to make their plugin technology...choice
friendly...so that users have a choice between adobe and open flash
plugins on a per user basis.
This idea about a script is not that radical. You tell why running
closed souce players is bad, as we currently do with explaining why
non open codecs are bad with codeina, and then IF users decide setup a
yum repository from adobe.
Why is proprietary software bad generally? If you can't answer that
for yourself, then I'm not sure why you are putting so much effort
into the fedora mailinglists.
-jef"My secret shame is picasa"spaleta
4:18 p.m.
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008, Valent Turkovic wrote:
Plus if you look at reviews of linux distributions most of them have
a
category "How easy is it to go to youtube and watch videos" because that
is what desktop users do and expect from any desktop.
Here are some truths that I hold dear. I believe that they are
*fundamental* truths of the Fedora project.
1. It's not always easy to be true *free software* advocates. We take the
good with the bad.
2. The people we care most about are people who care about advancing the
best of *free software*.
3. Ubuntu is already catering to users who are willing to sacrifice
freedom for the sake of *marginal* usability advantage. There's really no
reason for us to follow them down that path. Will it cost us users? It
certainly will. But we are *extremely* competitive with Ubuntu when it
comes to *contributors* -- and it's *contributors* who change the world.
Let Spaceman worry about being popular. Let's concern ourselves with
being right, and being productive -- even when it's difficult.
"Fedora -- Ubuntu's more responsible older brother."
--g
--
Greg DeKoenigsberg
Community Development Manager
Red Hat, Inc. :: 1-919-754-4255
"To whomsoever much hath been given...
...from him much shall be asked"
12:39 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 11:18 PM, Greg DeKoenigsberg <gdk(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008, Valent Turkovic wrote:
> Plus if you look at reviews of linux distributions most of them have a
> category "How easy is it to go to youtube and watch videos" because that
> is what desktop users do and expect from any desktop.
Here are some truths that I hold dear. I believe that they are
*fundamental* truths of the Fedora project.
1. It's not always easy to be true *free software* advocates. We take the
good with the bad.
2. The people we care most about are people who care about advancing the
best of *free software*.
3. Ubuntu is already catering to users who are willing to sacrifice
freedom for the sake of *marginal* usability advantage. There's really no
reason for us to follow them down that path. Will it cost us users? It
certainly will. But we are *extremely* competitive with Ubuntu when it
comes to *contributors* -- and it's *contributors* who change the world.
Let Spaceman worry about being popular. Let's concern ourselves with
being right, and being productive -- even when it's difficult.
"Fedora -- Ubuntu's more responsible older brother."
I don't know how ubuntu deals with flash as I don't use it, and I
don't care. I care because I use fedora and I, as much as I would like
to, can't use fedora without flash player installed from adobe :(
Until others great projects like swf-dec or gnash become a working
soultion (and also free and oss versions, and patent free versions of
multimedia codecs) we need not-perfect solution. Is codeina a perfect
solution, it is not... but stil it serves a great purpose of making
fedora a better desktop.
Valent.
--
http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/
linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless
registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org.
ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic
9:26 a.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
| Let Spaceman worry about being popular. Let's concern ourselves with
| being right, and being productive -- even when it's difficult.
Amen.
- --
http://www.gutenberg.net - Fine literature digitally re-published
http://www.plos.org - Public Library of Science
http://www.creativecommons.org - Flexible copyright for creative work
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHxYEXXQZpNTcrCzMRAh2RAJ95JboVDBI7JjYgR97YluXhqknB0QCdH8Yi
/R3ilo+eDnUa2wTy+8rysZ0=
=jzin
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
10:37 a.m.
Since it looks like more people are reading *this* thread than the thread
that I care about, I'm going to completely hijack this thread to repost my
call for attendees at our next Fedora marketing meeting. :)
As of right now, there are *three* people who have committed to attending.
These meetings will be determining the talking points for Fedora.
Discussions on mailing lists are great input, but the meetings are where
the real work gets assigned, and where *leaders step up*.
You've got until the end of the day to ack a meeting time. If we don't
get any more participants, we'll go with the participants we have.
Thanks to Mr. Roberts and Mr. Sundaram for stepping up so far.
====
Where we left off:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Marketing/Tasks
I'd like to have a meeting, using this task list as the agenda, sometime
this week.
Proposed meeting times (all eastern US time):
1300-1700 Thursday
1000-1700 Friday
If you'd like to attend, please RSVP with times you can make. Meeting
will be held on #fedora-mktg on freenode.
--g
--
Greg DeKoenigsberg
Community Development Manager
Red Hat, Inc. :: 1-919-754-4255
"To whomsoever much hath been given...
...from him much shall be asked"
4:31 p.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 12:40 PM, Valent Turkovic
<valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Okay. And you actually belive that people won't install this
just the
same but will be "pissed" that it is not easy to do it but they need
to "jump through hoops" and there are legal ways to do this.
If you can get firefox's plugin technology fixed such that it gives
users a choice as to which flash implementation to choose... you
should champion that. A fedora specific fix isn't that interesting to
me. But if you can convince firefox developers to extend how their
plugin technology works so our users or anyone's users can choose
between open and closed flash plugins..well then.. that's a win for
everyone.
Plus if you look at reviews of linux distributions most of them have
a
category "How easy is it to go to youtube and watch videos" because
that is what desktop users do and expect from any desktop.
I'm not denying this. Open flash technology exists, you know about it,
you know its not as good as it could be. Put your passion into
figuring out how we can make that open technology better and legally
distributable. Hint: tying the open flash plugins to codeina and
enhancing codeina's capability to expose multiple open vendors. Get
people fired up about that.. not about including easy to grab
proprietary software.
-jef
1:42 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 11:31 PM, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 12:40 PM, Valent Turkovic
<valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Okay. And you actually belive that people won't install this just the
> same but will be "pissed" that it is not easy to do it but they need
> to "jump through hoops" and there are legal ways to do this.
If you can get firefox's plugin technology fixed such that it gives
users a choice as to which flash implementation to choose... you
should champion that.
I'll try to do this. Can you hive me some tips for how to start doing
this and the nudge in the right direction. I know about mozilla
bugzilla but if there are some tips and suggestions please share them
here.
A fedora specific fix isn't that interesting to
me. But if you can convince firefox developers to extend how their
plugin technology works so our users or anyone's users can choose
between open and closed flash plugins..well then.. that's a win for
everyone.
Agreed.
> Plus if you look at reviews of linux distributions most of
them have a
> category "How easy is it to go to youtube and watch videos" because
> that is what desktop users do and expect from any desktop.
I'm not denying this. Open flash technology exists, you know about it,
you know its not as good as it could be. Put your passion into
figuring out how we can make that open technology better and legally
distributable. Hint: tying the open flash plugins to codeina and
enhancing codeina's capability to expose multiple open vendors.
I'm not aware of other open vendors, can you point me in the right dirrection?
I'm only aware of livna codecs with which swf-dec works but are
illegal for fedora to use.
Get
people fired up about that.. not about including easy to grab
proprietary software.
Ok, I'm only suggesting that for F9 flash player from adobe also
becomes a test as was the test with codeina, and we work on swf-dec
and work better, much better, for F10 or F11.
Cheers,
Valent.
--
http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/
linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless
registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org.
ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic
2:43 p.m.
On Fri, 2008-02-22 at 22:40 +0100, Valent Turkovic wrote:
Plus if you look at reviews of linux distributions most of them have
a
category "How easy is it to go to youtube and watch videos" because
that is what desktop users do and expect from any desktop.
Fedora is not about chasing the tail of other people's innovations.
Every few years these "must have" requirements change. There was barely
a YouTube.com three years ago, and Flash was only up-and-coming five
years ago.
The longer you are involved in computers + people, the more times you'll
see a "must have" requirement that didn't exist twelve months ago and
won't exist twelve months from now.
- Karsten
--
Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr.
Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com
Fedora : http://quaid.fedorapeople.org
gpg key : AD0E0C41
3:01 p.m.
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 12:43:10 -0800
"Karsten 'quaid' Wade" <kwade(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Every few years these "must have" requirements change.
There was
barely a YouTube.com three years ago, and Flash was only
up-and-coming five years ago.
The longer you are involved in computers + people, the more times
you'll see a "must have" requirement that didn't exist twelve months
ago and won't exist twelve months from now.
Except when it's, you know, a web browser as a must have. (:
--
Jesse Keating RHCE (jkeating.livejournal.com)
Fedora Project (fedoraproject.org/wiki/JesseKeating)
GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub)
4:31 p.m.
On Fri, 2008-02-22 at 12:30 -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Valent Turkovic
<valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> This is the idea:
> Can there be a script on Fedora desktop that says something like this:
> "Install Flash Player" that enables adobe yum repository, presents the
> licence and if users agree goes
> out and install the flash plugin.
I will not support that. In fact I will actively lobby against
including a Fedora specific enhancement that directs people to
proprietary executable code.
-jef
I have to agree with Jef on this. +1 from me. Yes I use the ati drivers
and the flash plugin but I make sure I use open source ones every
release to see if it's fixed and post appropriate bugs. I did this with
the ipw3945 iwl3945 and now I don't need the ipw3945 drivers. This is
important because the bugs people report help the dev's fix the issues.
Cheers,
Marc
4:42 p.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Marc Wiriadisastra <marc(a)mwiriadi.id.au> wrote:
I have to agree with Jef on this. +1 from me. Yes I use the ati
drivers
and the flash plugin but I make sure I use open source ones every
release to see if it's fixed and post appropriate bugs. I did this with
the ipw3945 iwl3945 and now I don't need the ipw3945 drivers. This is
important because the bugs people report help the dev's fix the issues.
This is the big cultural shift tha we need to find a way to
communicate....to market.
Everything in the technical laypress culture is about...consumption.
Everything is treated like 'bits in a box.' We have to change this. We
have to market the process of collaboration. That's the secret that
we need to whisper into the ears of technojournals. Yes the bits are
important, the bits are cool, but the secret sauce is the partnership
between users and developers that drives things forward. That's the
story we need people out there telling.
Fedora as the active and vital meeting place between users and
developers... not Fedora the 'bits in a box' that comes out every 6
months. The 6 month releases an important part of that dialog...
but its not the dialog. We have to find a way to get stories about
upstream projects working through Fedora to advance their
development...Fedora as the path to a better tomorrow. We need to get
technojounals talking about individual upstream projects, and get
upstream projects praising us as helping them connect with users to
drive development forward.
-jef
1:36 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 11:42 PM, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Marc Wiriadisastra
<marc(a)mwiriadi.id.au> wrote:
> I have to agree with Jef on this. +1 from me. Yes I use the ati drivers
> and the flash plugin but I make sure I use open source ones every
> release to see if it's fixed and post appropriate bugs. I did this with
> the ipw3945 iwl3945 and now I don't need the ipw3945 drivers. This is
> important because the bugs people report help the dev's fix the issues.
This is the big cultural shift tha we need to find a way to
communicate....to market.
Everything in the technical laypress culture is about...consumption.
Everything is treated like 'bits in a box.' We have to change this. We
have to market the process of collaboration. That's the secret that
we need to whisper into the ears of technojournals. Yes the bits are
important, the bits are cool, but the secret sauce is the partnership
between users and developers that drives things forward. That's the
story we need people out there telling.
Fedora as the active and vital meeting place between users and
developers... not Fedora the 'bits in a box' that comes out every 6
months. The 6 month releases an important part of that dialog...
but its not the dialog. We have to find a way to get stories about
upstream projects working through Fedora to advance their
development...Fedora as the path to a better tomorrow. We need to get
technojounals talking about individual upstream projects, and get
upstream projects praising us as helping them connect with users to
drive development forward.
Jeff this sound great, but can this be also communicated directly to
fedora userbase?
Right now people new to fedora come to fedora website (or at some
fedora booth at a conference), download or copy fedora cd/dvd, install
it, try to surf and when they come to some flash site they get an
error while flash player fails to install. They generally conclude
that fedora "sucks". They don't see this message you are saying.
It would be nice if you and others see this as an issue and also try
to communicate somehow directly to fedora users vs. indirectly via
some marketing and press releases which new fedora users rarely see.
Valent.
--
http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/
linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless
registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org.
ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic
1:48 a.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 10:36 PM, Valent Turkovic
<valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Right now people new to fedora come to fedora website (or at some
fedora booth at a conference), download or copy fedora cd/dvd, install
it, try to surf and when they come to some flash site they get an
error while flash player fails to install. They generally conclude
that fedora "sucks". They don't see this message you are saying.
You know... if you could encourage the upstream firefox developers to
make their plugin detection technology more flexible so we could
easily redirect firefox users to a page we controlled with information
concerning the situation.......we'd be most of the way there to
telling people why we are so very dearly sorry that flash doesn't work
out of the box.
It would be nice if you and others see this as an issue and also try
to communicate somehow directly to fedora users vs. indirectly via
some marketing and press releases which new fedora users rarely see.
It wishes were fishes.... I think this sort of messaging about users
being partners in the process is on Paul's roadmap as part of his plan
to lower the barrier to entry for contributors.
-jef
10:55 a.m.
On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Valent Turkovic
<valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Right now people new to fedora come to fedora website (or at some
fedora booth at a conference), download or copy fedora cd/dvd, install
it, try to surf and when they come to some flash site they get an
error while flash player fails to install. They generally conclude
that fedora "sucks". They don't see this message you are saying.
All this debate about flash, if I remember correctly, the firefox
plugin installer installed flash well to my box. Just with one catch
.. ~/.mozilla/plugins/ directory must exist or the installation will
fail.
--
Mohd Izhar Firdaus Bin Ismail
Amano Hikaru
天野晃 「あまの ひかる」
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MohdIzharFirdaus
http://blog.kagesenshi.org
92C2 B295 B40B B3DC 6866 5011 5BD2 584A 8A5D 7331
2:25 a.m.
On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 5:55 PM, Mohd Izhar Firdaus Ismail
<mohd.izhar.firdaus(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Valent Turkovic
<valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Right now people new to fedora come to fedora website (or at some
> fedora booth at a conference), download or copy fedora cd/dvd, install
> it, try to surf and when they come to some flash site they get an
> error while flash player fails to install. They generally conclude
> that fedora "sucks". They don't see this message you are saying.
All this debate about flash, if I remember correctly, the firefox
plugin installer installed flash well to my box. Just with one catch
.. ~/.mozilla/plugins/ directory must exist or the installation will
fail.
I'll test this and if it shows to be the fix I'll reopen the bug that
Matej closed so many times :)
Valent.
--
http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/
linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless
registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org.
ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic
9:16 a.m.
On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 5:55 PM, Mohd Izhar Firdaus Ismail
<mohd.izhar.firdaus(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Valent Turkovic
<valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Right now people new to fedora come to fedora website (or at some
> fedora booth at a conference), download or copy fedora cd/dvd, install
> it, try to surf and when they come to some flash site they get an
> error while flash player fails to install. They generally conclude
> that fedora "sucks". They don't see this message you are saying.
All this debate about flash, if I remember correctly, the firefox
plugin installer installed flash well to my box. Just with one catch
.. ~/.mozilla/plugins/ directory must exist or the installation will
fail.
I have checked on multiple systems, and on all of them I have
~/.mozilla/plugins/ directory but still adobe flash player install
fails.
Valent.
--
http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/
linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless
registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org.
ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic
9:27 a.m.
Valent Turkovic wrote:
I have checked on multiple systems, and on all of them I have
~/.mozilla/plugins/ directory but still adobe flash player install
fails.
Can you please not discuss issues nothing to do with Fedora marketing on
this list? Even the original posting was off topic in the first place.
Rahul
4:40 p.m.
El vie, 22-02-2008 a las 12:30 -0900, Jeff Spaleta escribió:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Valent Turkovic
<valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> This is the idea:
> Can there be a script on Fedora desktop that says something like this:
> "Install Flash Player" that enables adobe yum repository, presents the
> licence and if users agree goes
> out and install the flash plugin.
I will not support that. In fact I will actively lobby against
including a Fedora specific enhancement that directs people to
proprietary executable code.
+1
Fedora is Freedom!, no non free thing must be included. We must promote
free formats and free alternatives.
If a program will help to install non free codec, this program must
inform to user about this
-jef
--
Eduardo Villagrán Morales
Embajador Fedora
Linuxdiinf.org
1:05 a.m.
2008/2/22 Eduardo Villagrán Morales <eduardo.villagran.morales(a)gmail.com>:
El vie, 22-02-2008 a las 12:30 -0900, Jeff Spaleta escribió:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Valent Turkovic
> <valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > This is the idea:
> > Can there be a script on Fedora desktop that says something like this:
> > "Install Flash Player" that enables adobe yum repository, presents
the
> > licence and if users agree goes
> > out and install the flash plugin.
>
> I will not support that. In fact I will actively lobby against
> including a Fedora specific enhancement that directs people to
> proprietary executable code.
+1
Fedora is Freedom!, no non free thing must be included. We must promote
free formats and free alternatives.
Currently there are 0 free and/or legal alternatives. Please do
research about this subject...
If a program will help to install non free codec, this program must
inform to user about this
Agreed.
--
http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/
linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless
registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org.
ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic
1:38 p.m.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 10:07 AM, Christopher Aillon <caillon(a)redhat.com> wrote:
No. We can't distribute it nor point to others that do.
It's called
"aiding and abetting". Not only is prostitution illegal; pimping
prostitutes is illegal too.
Oops.
-jef"There goes my Starbucks latte budget"spaleta
9:24 a.m.
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Zhukov Pavel wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 6:04 PM, Valent Turkovic
> <valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> fyi
>>
>> http://www.ubuntu-trading.com/
>>
>> --
>> Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
>> Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
>>
>
> there is one interesting graph about fedora and ubuntu:
> http://www.google.com/trends?q=fedora%2C+ubuntu
>
> i'm talking with around 10 people "what feature in ubuntu better than
> similar in fedora". most of them told me: "one click install for
> codecs, nvidia drivers, etc".
... which Fedora is never going to support.
Rahul
You ment:
Will support when there are ways of legaly distributing it?
or
When those are under OSS licences.
9:43 a.m.
Valent Turkovic wrote:
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Zhukov Pavel wrote:
>> i'm talking with around 10 people "what feature in
ubuntu better than
>> similar in fedora". most of them told me: "one click install for
>> codecs, nvidia drivers, etc".
> ... which Fedora is never going to support.
You ment:
Will support when there are ways of legaly distributing it?
or
When those are under OSS licences.
Pretty much both, or at least amending your first statement to:
Will support when there are ways of legally distributing or
linking-to/referencing it.
<rant>
Damn you Isle of Man and your lack of law and jurisdiction! :) That said,
distributing patent encumbered GPL software violates at least the intent,
if not the letter, of the GPL. Shame on them!
</rant>
-- Rex
4:03 p.m.
New subject: RES: ubuntu marketing
What I´ve heard is the better availability of software in debian repos.
-----Mensagem original-----
De: fedora-marketing-list-bounces(a)redhat.com
[mailto:fedora-marketing-list-bounces@redhat.com] Em nome de Zhukov Pavel
Enviada em: sexta-feira, 22 de fevereiro de 2008 12:15
Para: For discussions about marketing and expanding the Fedora user base
Assunto: Re: ubuntu marketing
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 6:04 PM, Valent Turkovic <valent.turkovic(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
fyi
http://www.ubuntu-trading.com/
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
there is one interesting graph about fedora and ubuntu:
http://www.google.com/trends?q=fedora%2C+ubuntu
i'm talking with around 10 people "what feature in ubuntu better than
similar in fedora". most of them told me: "one click install for codecs,
nvidia drivers, etc".
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
3 a.m.
On 2/22/08, Zhukov Pavel wrote:
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 6:04 PM, Valent Turkovic
there is one interesting graph about fedora and ubuntu:
http://www.google.com/trends?q=fedora%2C+ubuntu
i'm talking with around 10 people "what feature in ubuntu better than
similar in fedora". most of them told me: "one click install for
codecs, nvidia drivers, etc".
Well, I'm sick with the same topic each month.
Why every month someone has to pop this topic again ??
Zhurov:
It depends to whom you are asking for.
I know many educational institutions are recommending their students to use:
* RHEL
* fedora
* centos
* opensuse
for the mere simple reason, because in their professional life they
will _only_ use Red Hat based distros or Novel Suse based.
Chitlesh
3:03 a.m.
Chitlesh GOORAH wrote:
On 2/22/08, Zhukov Pavel wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 6:04 PM, Valent Turkovic
> there is one interesting graph about fedora and ubuntu:
> http://www.google.com/trends?q=fedora%2C+ubuntu
>
> i'm talking with around 10 people "what feature in ubuntu better than
> similar in fedora". most of them told me: "one click install for
> codecs, nvidia drivers, etc".
Well, I'm sick with the same topic each month.
Why every month someone has to pop this topic again ??
+1000
Regards,
Pierre
9:25 a.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Zhukov Pavel wrote:
| there is one interesting graph about fedora and ubuntu:
| http://www.google.com/trends?q=fedora%2C+ubuntu
Please please read http://www.google.com/intl/en/trends/about.html#6 as well
- --
http://www.gutenberg.net - Fine literature digitally re-published
http://www.plos.org - Public Library of Science
http://www.creativecommons.org - Flexible copyright for creative work
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFHxYDiXQZpNTcrCzMRAgECAJ47RKykZKz/qLUbvxKuVdAN5GhqBACeOqyr
QbIYIcctSKqxJns0uPYDMQI=
=FJ1T
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
5933
days inactive
5938
days old
marketing@lists.fedoraproject.org
54 comments
23 participants
participants (23)
-
Chitlesh GOORAH -
Christopher Aillon -
Eduardo Villagrán Morales -
Greg DeKoenigsberg -
Jef Spaleta -
Jeffrey Tadlock -
Jesse Keating -
John Babich -
Jon Stanley -
Jonathan Roberts -
Juan Rodriguez -
Karsten Wade -
Luis Felipe Marzagao/Yahoo -
Marc Wiriadisastra -
Mohd Izhar Firdaus Ismail -
pingou -
Rahul Sundaram -
Rex Dieter -
Russell Harrison -
sankarshan -
Szabolcs Szakacsits -
Valent Turkovic -
Zhukov Pavel