[x264-devel] Re: H.264 encoder

[Guillaume POIRIER]

Hi,

On 2/1/06, Panagiotis Issaris <takis.issaris at uhasselt.be> wrote:

[..]

> >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.

First of all, I'm not an x264 dev, so my voice has no weight at all.
I think it would probably be wise for the company who have some
interest in using x264 to start contributing patch to clearly show
that they _can_ contribute to the project instead of asking for a
licence change and swearing that they'll contribute to the project
once the licence is changed.

I assume that those contributions, if licenced under LGPL+GPL will be
still available once the project gets its licenced changed.

After all, x264 is already quite feature-rich, so it appears to me
that companies have a lot more to gain from the licence change than
the project, all the more if the company contributions are few are far
between.

Making money with free software is A Ok, as long as both parties
benefit from the greater spectrum of users.

Just my 2c...

Guillaume

--
A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones that need the advice.
    Bill Cosby

MPlayer's doc isn't up-to-date. Visit my updated mirror here:
http://tuxrip.free.fr//MPlayer-DOCS-HTML/en/
http://tuxrip.free.fr//MPlayer-DOCS-HTML/fr/

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