[FFmpeg-devel] Snow documentation effort

Benjamin Larsson benjamin at southpole.se
Sat Feb 25 12:00:27 CET 2012

On 02/25/2012 07:58 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 11:17:25PM +0100, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
>> [...]
>> 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
> libav.
> Thats just my uneducated feeling, iam not a lawyer.

This is from the foundation bylaws:

1. To coordinate and promote the development, production, distribution, 
and use of Free and
Open Source Software useful for recording, converting, and playing audio 
and video, in-
cluding the program known as FFmpeg and the software library known as 
libavcodec (the

Thus I don't agree with what you wrote above.

> 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 ?

Well the no webpage situation i bad. We will publish spendings on it but 
I see no point in disclosing the result in the vote.

> 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.

Yes I agree we do something different, but that doesn't mean it is a bad 
thing. My aim is to favor those who develop FFmpeg/Libav as I believe 
that is better in the long run.

>> 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.

We need to follow the bylaws which we do (IMO).

>> 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.

By finding a well defined project and someone willing to do the project 
and then send the suggestion to the board.

Benjamin Larsson

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list