[x264-devel] License of x264 and request from users

[Laurent Aimar]

It is about GPL license of x264 :

> ----- Forwarded message from Guilhem Tardy <gravsten at yahoo.com> -----
> From: Guilhem Tardy <gravsten at yahoo.com>
> Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 23:07:44 -0800 (PST)
> To: ffmpeg-devel at mplayerhq.hu
> Subject: Re: [Ffmpeg-devel] why not have h264encoder in the libavcodec?
> 
> There were many good points made last week about h264 encoder for FFMPEG.
> 
> I especially appreciated Luca Barbato's comment:
> 
> > The point of lgpl and gpl is in fact respectively foster
> > the usage or foster the free software development.
> 
> >From the prompt release of x264 stubs for FFMPEG last time this issue of a LGPL
> H.264 encoder was discussed here (spring 2005), I conclude that the x264 team
> wants their library to be used as widely as possible.
> 
> And the debate of last week showed that some contributors to both x264 and
> FFMPEG (e.g. Mike Melanson) are open to the LGPL.
> 
> I would also expect (as shown in countless previous posts) that the FFMPEG team
> would prefer a "native" H.264 codec (whether LGPL or GPL) compared to stubs for
> an external library such as x264.

 I have also received requests to change license from GPL to LGPL.

 I do not know the opinions of others developpers or if this issue has
already been discussed elsewhere.
 I think it would be nice to have an 'official' statement upon this issue.


In my case:
 I am not in favour of changing to LGPL (I used GPL license on purpose) but
I will not refuse it if all current main developpers want to do it.

-- 
fenrir

-- 
This is the x264-devel mailing-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://developers.videolan.org/lists.html