[FFmpeg-devel] Fwd: framebuffer device demuxer
Thu Jan 27 11:34:49 CET 2011
Stefano Sabatini <stefano.sabatini-lala <at> poste.it> writes:
> On date Wednesday 2011-01-26 23:56:05 +0100, Diego Biurrun encoded:
> > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 11:18:38PM +0100, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> > > On date Wednesday 2011-01-26 10:55:56 +0100, Diego Biurrun encoded:
> > > > On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:47:35PM +0100, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> > > > > + * Based on code from fbgrab.c by Gunnar Monell.
> > > >
> > > > What license was that code?
> > >
> > > GPL, I concluded that there is not enough code in common to impose the
> > > use of GPL, though I have no problem at re-licensing the file under
> > > GPL if someone insists on this.
> > Your "based on" wording suggests more than that. This is dangerous
> > territory, which parts are based on what? If you want to be absolutely
> > sure, you could ask Gunnar to allow you to use his code under LGPL.
I got the following polite request from Stefano Sabatini:
"I'm an FFmpeg developer and I picked an old patch on ffmpeg-devel by
Giliard, check this thread:
The patch implements an input device for the Linux framebuffer.
The patch by Giliard was presumably based on the fbgrab.c code and was
using the GPL license, as fbgrab.c itself.
I ask you if you have problems at allowing the derivative code to be
licensed as LGPL rather than GPL. We believe there is not much code in
common, and we prefer to adopt LGPL in favor of GPL for simplifying
the licensing conditions of use of FFmpeg.
Please reply to me, or even better on ffmpeg-devel if that's not too
demanding for you.
Best regards, thanks so far for the contribution."
I have no problem with you relicensing this code under LGPL.
But I truly suggest that someone tries to readjust the settings for
http://post.gmane.org, I tried to write this as a one-liner, but it just
continued on complaining about the ratio new/old, so I had to write this as an
Anyways keep up the good work.
More information about the ffmpeg-devel