[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] G722 decoder

[Diego Biurrun]

On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 06:42:45PM +0000, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> Baptiste Coudurier <baptiste.coudurier at gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > On 3/25/2009 10:31 AM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> >> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:25:26AM -0700, Baptiste Coudurier wrote:
> >>> On 3/25/2009 10:11 AM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> >>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 09:58:50AM -0700, Baptiste Coudurier wrote:
> >>>>> On 3/25/2009 9:43 AM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> >>>>>> Maybe you could be kind enough to explain how *any* program can be
> >>>>>> distributed as LGPL v2.1+ in your view.  It seems to be plain
> >>>>>> impossible from what you write.
> >>>>> Well:
> >>>>> [...]
> >>>> Answer my question.
> >>>>
> >>>>> But "as is" ffmpeg.c without modifications cannot be considered
> >>>>> a "Library"
> >>>> Sure, but the LGPL can be applied to programs that are not libraries.
> >>>> The wording of the LGPL becomes a bit awkward in this case.
> >>>>
> >>> Yes and, according to the license, it becomes awkward and then weak.
> >>> Legal terms are usually not mean to be weak like this.
> >> 
> >> You will hear with dismay that the wording in v3 is improved.
> >
> > Then why don't you upgrade the license ?
> 
> He can't do that without permission from the copyright holders.  I
> also hope he doesn't want to.

I could due to the fact that they have already given permission through
the "or later" clause.  I do not intend to do this, nor is it something
that should be done by a single dev all on his own.

I could of course make a private copy of FFmpeg and updgrade the license
any time I want.

Diego