Licensing issue for binary packages

5 views
Skip to first unread message

Sherpya

unread,
Nov 15, 2009, 12:40:24 AM11/15/09
to pyffmpeg-dev
I've made available a snapshot with static ffmpeg build for mingw, my
current build of ffmpeg is gplv3 (because of opencore amr). It's
compatible with pyffmpeg's lgplv2+ or I need to build without --enable-
gpl3?

This may be an useful info for binary packagers

Bertrand Nouvel

unread,
Nov 23, 2009, 12:47:21 AM11/23/09
to pyffmp...@googlegroups.com

2009/11/15 Sherpya <she...@gmail.com>


I've made available a snapshot with static ffmpeg build for mingw, my
current build of ffmpeg is gplv3 (because of opencore amr). It's
compatible with pyffmpeg's lgplv2+ or I need to build without --enable-
gpl3?



Hi Sherpya,

Sorry for late reply, I've been particularly busy these last weeks.

Good question... I am not all an expert in free software licences.

Personally I would be ok to shift the code from
GPLv2, to GPLv3 for the next release that is a complete rewrite
providing that the previous authors of PyFFMPEG also aggree on
that point. I will try to contact them to see if they agree. Maybe,
even go LGPLv3 or MIT license which would be much convenient
since the PyFFMPEG is only a small library, but to be sure, I
will contact all the previous authors of the package.

Regarding the fact that you are doing windows built for FFMPEG,
and that you are interested in PyFFMPEG, I was wondering if you
would be interestesting in providing regular builts for pyffmpeg + pyffmpeg-beta. I believe users do need a package that work out-of-the-box for using python for image processing.

I will try to work on providing regular builts for linux and mac os too

Looking forward your reply.

Bertrand

PS : I am thinking about our precedent issue and on how to implement properly the compatibility with different libraries.

Bertrand Nouvel

unread,
Nov 26, 2009, 10:32:28 AM11/26/09
to pyffmp...@googlegroups.com
Hi All,

I've discussed with James Evans, and he agreed to allow us to change the license
of PyFFMPEG to a more permissive one.
Basically, it means that we will be  shifting from the license from GPLv2 to a more permissive
license, like MIT or LGPLv3. I think LGPLv3 suits well our need.

If nobody is against during next days, I believe I will update metadata, history file,
and project to reflect this change.

Thanks to Sherpya for pointing out his licensing issue.

Bertrand



2009/11/23 Bertrand Nouvel <bertran...@gmail.com>
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages