Minitube Not Playing Videos
- Anmelden oder Registrieren um Kommentare zu schreiben
Hello all,
I was wondering if anyone else was having trouble playing Youtube videos via Minitube in Trisquel 6.0?
The version of Minitube I have is straight from the repos, and is currently at 1.61.
Was there perhaps an API change that requires an updated version of Minitube? Is there perhaps a PPA or backport of Minitube that would fix the problem? Any way to guarantee that a PPA is fully free/libre software?
Thanks!
I am a translator!
You can update to the latest version by using this PPA:
sudo add-apt-repository ppa:ferramroberto/minitube
sudo aptitude update
sudo aptitude upgrade
>Any way to guarantee that a PPA is fully free/libre software?
Peek in every single file. Unless the source code (is available! and) displays a FSF approved license, it's not free. Here are the most common free licenses http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
> name at domain wrote:
> You can update to the latest version by using this PPA:
>
> sudo add-apt-repository ppa:ferramroberto/minitube
> sudo aptitude update
> sudo aptitude upgrade
Thank you for the PPA instructions; it worked like a charm and Minitube is playing videos perfectly now.
> name at domain wrote:
> Peek in every single file. Unless the source code (is available! and)
> displays a FSF approved license, it's not free. Here are the most common free
> licenses http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
I was afraid that would be the only way. While searching for for PPA instructions for Minitube, I ran across this forum topic (http://ur1.ca/e8atr), which talked about the possibility of creating a directory of free PPA's, similiar to ABrowser's free add-ons listing.
Any possibility that any work has been done in this direction? I think it would be a tremendous boon to Trisquel, even if it was just set up on a wiki.
I agree free PPAs would be nice. But it's a somewhat tricky proposition.
First one would need to check out the licensing of every single file on the PPA. Many people are lazy and don't include any licensing details and leave people guessing. Or maybe they're infringing somebody's copyright, who knows. Of course one could add a misleading license to a proprietary file but that probably is much more rare. And that would not be enough because they can and will be updated, so unless they have a policy to only include free software, they could include non-free stuff in a heartbeat.
On the other hand this is a work anybody can do. If you understand the basics of licensing, you can go crawl a PPA and then try to find out if they have a policy.
- Anmelden oder Registrieren um Kommentare zu schreiben