On Sat, 8 Aug 2020 19:57:09 +0200 "Nicolas George" <geo...@nsup.org> wrote:
> > Tables that were not just written by the code author are > not actually source code, otherwise, > "recode data..x1 < proprietary.o > source.c" > would be enough to launder a proprietary blob into > the source code. > > Documenting the origin of the tables or the methods > for their generation is necessary to let other developers > take over if the original author is no longer available. > > Signed-off-by: Nicolas George <geo...@nsup.org> > --- > doc/developer.texi | 8 ++++++++ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > > I count: > > - Two objections, to which I have answered, and who have not given > follow up. > > - One objection about a typo, I fixed "engineered" and proof-read > everything carefully. > > - Two positive opinions. > I'm apprehensive about this, especially in the case of reverse-engineered tables. It should definitely be encouraged, but not necessarily hard-required. If you explicitly say "Reverse Engineered from so-and-so", that seems essentially like putting a target on FFmpeg's back. Case-in-point: No reference decoder/encoder exists, and the tables had to be dumped from the application binary. Zane _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
