[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] doc/developer: require transparency about sponshorships.

Nicolas George george at nsup.org
Sun Jan 13 17:06:42 EET 2019

James Almer (12019-01-13):
> If no one challenges, then either no one looked at it, or everyone that
> looked at it was fine with it. Where is the issue then?

If nobody looked, how can we know there is no obvious security issue?

> You're looking for a solution for a problem that doesn't exist.

Tell that to the people who have been insulted for raising valid
objections on sponsored work.

> Sponsored work has been disclosed before without any kind of guidelines.

Not all of it.

> If you want something people will not NAK on sight, write one where you
> require to double check who the copyright belongs to in case of
> sponsorship to prevent wrong commit authorship, and to *suggest* stating
> sponsorship status if the copyright ultimately belongs to the developer.
> Drop any mention about remuneration disclosure if it was not public to
> begin with, and then it can be discussed.

Re-read the rationale in the proposed patch: copyright is only one of


  Nicolas George
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20190113/7e2c4214/attachment.sig>

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list