[FFmpeg-devel] Snow documentation effort
michaelni at gmx.at
Sat Feb 25 07:58:37 CET 2012
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 11:17:25PM +0100, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 11:02:12PM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > And id be happy to write such spec, but iam not able to accept money
> > from the current foundation. There have been too many controversies
> > around it, i dont want to be associated with it in its current form.
> > Maybe if the next vote isnt "tuned" and the next directors
> > represent the free software the foundation is supposed to represent
> > ...
> Well, it would be easier if you'd see that as a chance for the
> foundation to prove its value.
Do you think its value would exceed the value of a ffmpeg foundation
created by us with the goal to support free multimedia and our users
compared to the system that the current ffmtech uses?
And i cant help but have to point out that to the best of my knowledge
ffmtech can actually not legally support libav and its directors
should be personally liable for all money that was used for libav.
Directors must act within the best interrests of the foundation, also
they cannot participate (aka even be in the same (virtual) room)
during votes that are about matters in which they have some personal
interrest that differs from the goals of the foundation. Thus no
libav developer could ever have supported a vote that gave money to
Thats just my uneducated feeling, iam not a lawyer.
Now in addition everything in the foundation is kept a closely guarded
secret. How much money was spend on what and who did participate in
the votes ?
In the real world, at least the one I know, when something should be
done (not really limited to non profits) the clean procedure is
to publish a description of the job and try to find the best offer
(aka lowest cost / most qualified)
Whatever the foundation is doing instead is something different.
> I mean it is a bit unfair if you complain you know about nobody
> who got money from them and then don't want to take money from
> them even if it was offered...
well, I oppose the way the foundation functions nowadays, with its
secrecy and especially the secret decission process that leads to
the choices of what is being supported.
If i did accept this offer here i would be too participating in this
system that i feel is not proper and i wonder if its legally allowed
for a tax exempt non profit to shuffle money around for public jobs
secretly to select people at all.
> If nobody tries to/wants to get money (from FFmpeg side) it's
> no wonder nobody does.
Where do you see public offers by the foundation about work that
would be funded ?
Either way iam very open to suggestions about what i could do to
improve the situation.
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad
people will find a way around the laws. -- Plato
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the ffmpeg-devel