[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] the future of libamr

[Baptiste Coudurier]

On 6/8/2009 1:51 PM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 01:38:26PM -0700, Baptiste Coudurier wrote:
>> Diego Biurrun wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 01:22:20PM -0700, Baptiste Coudurier wrote:
>>>> Diego Biurrun wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 12:45:15PM -0700, Baptiste Coudurier wrote:
>>>>>> Certainly not. IMHO, for libamr case, it's already there and keeping it
>>>>>> does not cost anything.
>>>>> It costs us the opportunity that somebody might get motivated to
>>>>> implement AMR-WB encoding support.
>>>> While I can see how this can be true, in practice I believe this has
>>>> proven to not have many results outside of FFmpeg.
>>>> Libswscale was reimplemented by Kostya, AAC decoder by GSOC then Robert,
>>>> now Alex, but this was still driven by FFmpeg and animated which I
>>>> reimplemented myself.
>>> I disagree.  HE-AAC is being sponsored by a Finnish company, you did
>>> quite a bit a bit of implementation work for your company, there are
>>> more examples..
>> You disagree with what exactly ? That reimplementation was done inside
>> FFmpeg team ? I'm sorry but I really believe this is true. Most (maybe
>> all) reimplementations were done by someone from FFmpeg team, or from
>> GSOC which was explicitely wanted and driven by FFmpeg team.
> 
> I'm saying that implementations and reimplementations have been funded
> by outside sources.  If the coder being funded was a part of the FFmpeg
> team or not is irrelevant.

Libswscale and Animated gif were funded ?

Hell, no, that's exactly the point. Nobody will "reimplement" something
that works because of FFmpeg's own interest, except one FFmpeg
developper or one developper from GSOC which was paid thanks to FFmpeg.

Now one company gratefully funded HE-AAC after the project was started
and left over from GSOC, that's great and I wish there would be more,
however it's not done yet, I hope it will be soon, but I don't think
removing libfaad did all help on this, it's still there in the tree and
hopefully it is otherwise you couldn't decode HE-AAC.

>>>>> It also costs me some credibility when dealing with license violators.
>>>>> We do not like companies distributing nonfree builds of FFmpeg, but we
>>>>> keep the means to create such builds.
>>>> "me" ? You mean FFmpeg
>>> I mean both FFmpeg as a project as well as myself when dealing with
>>> license violators.
>> It would more adequate to say "us" here then I think.
> 
> Correct.  It costs both myself as representative of FFmpeg credibility
> as well as FFmpeg as a project.

I think many developers could be and IMHO should be representative of
FFmpeg credibility. In case you didn't get it, I'll make it clear this
time: replace "myself" by "us". Thanks for your understanding.

-- 
Baptiste COUDURIER                              GnuPG Key Id: 0x5C1ABAAA
Key fingerprint                 8D77134D20CC9220201FC5DB0AC9325C5C1ABAAA
FFmpeg maintainer                                  http://www.ffmpeg.org