[FFmpeg-devel] some licensing issues

[Diego Biurrun]

On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 02:35:10AM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2007 at 07:43:17PM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 14, 2007 at 05:20:36PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Sat, Jul 14, 2007 at 04:37:02PM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 02:35:23AM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 06:00:14PM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I think the main question is how much mpeg2dec code remains in those
> > > > > > files.  I'm looking at yuv2rgb_mlib.c and AFAICT all the code was
> > > > > > rewritten by Michael.  The following 'svn annotate' is quite telling,
> > > > > > revision 2733 is the initial import, 9477 is a rewrite by Michael:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > http://svn.mplayerhq.hu/mplayer/trunk/libswscale/yuv2rgb_mlib.c?annotate=9477
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Basically only the license header, a few braces and #includes remain.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > IMO we should drop the mpeg2dec license header from that file and
> > > > > > replace it with an FFmpeg one.  Of course we can add a note to the
> > > > > > effect that this was once inspired by mpeg2dec.
> > > > > 
> > > > > My proposition is to replace the mpeg2dec header with an FFmpeg one.
> > > > > Opinions?  Objections?  Otherwise I intend to do this by the end of next
> > > > > week.
> > > > 
> > > > Michael, since this is your code: GPL or LGPL?
> > > 
> > > yuv2rgb_mlib.c ?
> > > 
> > > under what license is mlib actually? i didnt find any source and my attempt
> > > to download it ended at a "data mining" registration form from sun
> > > 
> > > if its not GPL compatible we should drop mlib support, but even if it is
> > > i am in favor of droping support for it, the advantages are small and i
> > > dont want to support these (sorry i cant translate the term from german)
> > > for whom (free == we will sell your personal data)
> > 
> > I do not disagree, but the question whether or not to make this GPL or
> > LGPL remains and is orthogonal to your point...
> 
> i dont care about the license of yuv2rgb_mlib.c do whatever you want with
> the code i wrote in it, public domain is fine with me

I'll go with LGPL for consistency then.

Diego