[MPlayer-dev-eng] libao2 usage in other projects

D Richard Felker III dalias at aerifal.cx
Tue Dec 30 06:16:54 CET 2003

On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 05:22:02AM +0100, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> <snip>
> > > > 2) We dont like external libs for things that should be done
> > > > inside the player itself
> > > What's the point, if this library is maintained by mplayer folks and
> > > provide mplayer's ilbao2 interface ?
> > 
> > You're asking the wrong question. The better questions is why we
> > should support using an "external" libao2 if we're the ones writing
> > it. There is no good answer.
> Because others can use it and so also others will contribute to it.

They can use it either way. It's GPL. Just type:
  cp -a mplayer/libao2 yourproject/libao2

> Why is mplayer an opensource project at all ?

Because information and software "are, and ought of right to be,

I couldn't care less about "open source" and Eric Raymond's stupid
libercrat sociology babble about bazaars. Free software is _NOT_ a
development methodology, and it does _NOT_ mean you let anyone and
everyone haphazardously contribute code into your repository. Take
this misconception back to slashdot where it belongs.

> > > If you fear 'bad influence' from other projects, you can still ship a
> > > own branch w/ mplayer, which may be replaced by the 'open' branch 
> > > at build time. (i.e. --with-openao=...)
> > 
> > This is useless added complexity.
> No, this is not useless. It allows others using it and contributing to
> it without having to cope with other parts of mplayer.

If others want to contribute they can send us a patch. Or they can
fork and we can copy back parts we like, while leaving out their
stupid changes. _THIS_ is the point of free software. People are
_free_ to do what they want with it, unrestricted by bad monopoly
laws. Nowhere does it say they're "free" to force us to accept their
bad patches (or bad design ideas).


More information about the MPlayer-dev-eng mailing list