[FFmpeg-devel] GPL version matter

Christophe GISQUET christophe.gisquet
Fri Jul 6 08:48:15 CEST 2007


M?ns Rullg?rd a ?crit :
> This patch is small and non-essential.  I don't think it's worth
> further complicating the license situation just for this piece of
> code.

That's true, and I would understand this decision.

> Regarding the "any version" clauses, I don't see how anyone that cares
> enough to choose a GPL-type license can place the fate of their work
> in the hands of the FSF.  Personally, I generally release code where I

That's a good point, as my point was more to try to contribute (as
sensibly as I could possibly perceive it) in the license framework
chosen by ffmpeg (LGPL).

There's really nothing I consider philosophical in my rejection of
LGPL2.1. If a v2.2 existed without the extension clause, I would choose
it anytime. To me, it's just a legal nonsense.

> am in full control under the MIT license, so I'm not terribly bothered
> by that clause being present in the license for FFmpeg.

Being indeed a small and very dependent piece of code, my code wouldn't
be used elsewhere than ffmpeg, so licensing of it is not very important.
But does ffmpeg accept code such as MIT, modified BSD or the like
compatible with GPL ?

> It is also a mystery to me how anyone can consciously release anything
> at all under terms as murky as the GPL.

I'm afraid you may also criticize your work contract, or the deals your
company is involved in, if you follow that fashion. That's one point of

Best regards,
Christophe GISQUET

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list