[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] improving shame list

[Michael Niedermayer]

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 11:28:49AM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 08:51:37PM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > 
> > When looking at our shame.html i was wondering if the list is not a little
> > too flat.
> > I mean it lists who violate our license with links to details but this makes
> > it quite hard for a causual visitor to see who is violating fineprint and
> > who is violating the spirit of the license, thus
> 
> They are all violating the spirit of the license, I have yet to see a
> fineprint violator, 

> whatever that may be.

an example would be someone who provides source under *GPL and clearly says
they use ffmpeg and that its available under *GPL but for example forget to
include the COPYING.LGPL text or include the wrong version of it.
Another example would be one complying to everything, provide source under
*GPL give prominent notice about all licenses but have a very complex EULA
that happens to contain a clause incompatible to the LGPL

I would have suspected that companies that are under the "making good
progress toward compliance" header since this header was created since almost
half a year ago, by now only violate fineprint.
But iam not in the mood for a fight with you, just a note from me, i do not
agree that a company is making good progress if they continue to violate
the LGPL and copyright in major ways for years after being informed about it

IMHO it should only be possible for a company to be on the good progress list
for a maximum of a month after that IMO it is not _good_ progress anymore.
thats my personal oppinon no request for a change, as said iam not going to
fight about this. And as you say there are more important things to do for
me ...


> 
> > I volunteer to write & post a patch that does change the list to such a table
> > but i dont volunteer to fill in things that arent in the current list.
> > Ill write&post that patch if there are no objections ...
> 
> To be completely honest, there are a bunch of things I'd rather see you
> do.  I think that - while well-intentioned - this will just spread
> valuable resources thinner than they already are.  We have the (sorry
> excuse for a) bug tracker to maintain the state of violations.
> 
> This sounds like a duplication of effort and waste of time to me, sorry.

i see your point, even if i dont fully agree with it.
What about just adding the date at which a company was added to the shame
list?
The effort is negligible, its just writing the current date during commit.

[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
-- Diogenes of Sinope
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20091026/c07fb12b/attachment.pgp>