[vlc-devel] [vlc-commits] Tag 2.2.3 : VLC media player 2.2.3 'WeatherWax'
jb at videolan.org
Wed Apr 27 17:57:30 CEST 2016
On 26 Apr, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote :
> are indirect economic interests, if only because it promotes VLC, VLC ports,
> and/or LibVLC, and elevates VideoLabs´ standing within the community.
Indeed. Though Videolabs goals are to improve VLC, nothing else.
If we do other businesses, they will be split up from that.
> > What our clients ask for is mostly support and libVLC integration, and
> > it is extremely rare that this require changes in vlc.git (I have just
> > one client in mind).
> I suspect that this is sadly but unsurprisingly the usual fare for open-source
> projects and service vendors. I am pretty sure that Lennart Poettering is not
> realizing a lot of contracts for Red Hat.
I do not disagree.
We are in the weird position with VLC, because there are no open source
B2C working business models, AFAIK.
> > Moreover, I already propose to pay for those code reviews, which are
> > appreciated (even if tough, sometimes).
> I know. At this point, it is entirely my own problem by my own fault.
> For the most part I have been too lazy to sort that out on my side. But I also
> do not trust my own self to keep my code reviews fair and proper if I get paid
> by the reviewee. And while I know this is a very imperfect metric, the last 12
Ok. the offer still stands.
> months commits by affiliation (derived from Ohloh) look like this:
> VideoLabs 59% (2485)
> Remlab 24% (1017)
> David F. 3.4% (144)
> Petri H. 1.7% (73)
> Mozilla 1.6% (71)
> Hannes D. 1.2% (51)
> Amino 0.8% (35)
Please note that Petri was partially contracted by us for some of those
> And that does not even account for mobile ports, web plug-ins and language
Indeed. Here, the shares are way higher for Videolabs, in those
I have no solution. But without this, a few of us wouldn't contribute
With my kindest regards,
http://www.jbkempf.com/ - +33 672 704 734
Sent from my Electronic Device
More information about the vlc-devel