[Fwd: [Bug 163675] mpeg situation not explained in documentation]
Nicu Buculei
nicu_fedora at nicubunu.ro
Fri Jul 22 06:19:17 UTC 2005
Karsten Wade wrote:
> I'm punting this over to the marketing side. The consensus on #fedora-
> docs is this:
>
> a) Fedora has not done a very good job of loudly advertising why we
> don't distribute certain codecs, although we do spend a lot of time
> addressing the topic in other ways.
>
> b) The complaint about multimedia is in every poorly researched review.
>
> c) This is the latest stick to beat Fedora with.
>
> d) An official rebuttal/comment on the situation might help.
>
> Any ideas on this?
I believe the best thing to do is what the original poster suggested in
Bugzilla:
"It would also be good (although I realise that this is the wrong place
for that) if stubs were installed for the missing components which
explain the situation. This has been done for xmms, but I think that's
the only place. The other affected programs just display very generic
and uninformative error messages, or they are just mysteriously missing."
I expect if such a stub is made as a gstreamer plugin, the majority of
multimedia apps in Fedora will be covered.
If the situation is clarified at the application level then I find
enough for release notes to mention it in a secondary, non-prominent place.
BTW, as this is a marketing list, when we will have and advertise some
mind-blowing multimedia applications based on free codecs to fill this void?
--
nicu
Open Clip Art Library: http://www.openclipart.org
More information about the Fedora-marketing-list
mailing list