[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Port x264 SSE2 deblocking code to H.264 decoder

Måns Rullgård mans
Wed Dec 17 19:58:54 CET 2008

"Jason Garrett-Glaser" <darkshikari at gmail.com> writes:

>> In such a case the existing functions should be fixed, not deleted.
> Is someone going to volunteer to do that though?
> By the way, this discussion is exactly the reason I was "whining" on
> #ffmpeg-devel earlier.  People can complain about me "not doing
> anything," but when I actually go to submit the patches, this is
> *exactly* what happens.
> Next time someone gets angry at me for complaining about how hard it
> is to get the simplest things committed here, I can just point them to
> this thread and show them how much arguing it took to get two optional
> functions added to dsputil--or perhaps how, despite so much arguing,
> it ended up not being added...
> I don't see how it's worth my effort to write even these trivial
> patches if they do nothing but generate massive bikeshed wars over
> whether it's a bad idea to allow *optional GPL code* despite the fact
> that, clearly, nobody is willing write the LGPL equivalent--if they
> were, it would have already happened sometime in the past 2 years.

I am only slightly opposed to adding *new* optimisations under gpl
only.  Something is always better than nothing.

I do however strongly object to *removing* existing lgpl code.  Doing
that would be a severe blow to those who for whatever reason cannot
use the gpl-enabled library.

M?ns Rullg?rd
mans at mansr.com

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list