[x264-devel] Re: H.264 encoder

[shauli.rozen at gmail.com]

Hi all

I also intended to reply in the previous thread , and was to lazy to do so.
I think changing the license to LGPL is OK , I think it will indeed result
in more
developers working on the code and making it better.

 True , some will just use the library as it is , but most will try to
improve the encoder and we will all benefit from it.


On 2/1/06, Panagiotis Issaris <takis.issaris at uhasselt.be> wrote:
>
> Hi x264 developers,
>
> Our current employer recently showed a strong interest for h264. More
> specifically, they want to have an LGPL implementation of an encoder
> preferably integrated in ffmpeg.
>
> x264 is using the GPL license, but I noticed a recent discussion [1] on
> this mailinglist in which a request for a possible license change
> was not totally rejected.
>
> In fact, in that discussion Laurent Aimar stated that he would not
> object a license change if all other developers would agree on this.
>
> Unfortunately, only one other develop replied to that thread, stating
> that he would agree only if it would imply that x264 would actually
> benefit from such a license change. Meaning that it would result in
> actual contributions to x264 and not just increasing its usage.
>
> What would the other developers of x264 think about a license change?
>
> >From our perspective, well, we just need an LGPL H.264 encoder. So
> regardless of the outcome, we will have to provide an LGPL licensed
> encoder. The difference would be, that instead of putting time and
> effort in reinventing the wheel while writing a new implementation, we
> could spent that time enhancing the existing codebase.
>
> With friendly regards,
> Takis & Jori
>
> [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video.x264.devel/893
>
> --
> This is the x264-devel mailing-list
> To unsubscribe, go to: http://developers.videolan.org/lists.html
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/x264-devel/attachments/20060201/dfb7b56c/attachment.htm