> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-boun...@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Jan
> Ekström
> If you just go without any rhetoric and just look at what "nonfree"
> (which IMHO is an awful name for the configuration option, it's just
> "non-distributable")
>
> We can start with the history of the option - originally added in
> 3fe142e2555ec8b527f2ff4cc517c015a114e91a (Jan, 2008) - to denote that due
> to the libamrnb/libamrwb wrappers being based on reference code, them
> being effectively not compatibly licensed even if someone was nice enough
> to make an open source wrapper around them. So it was all about open
> source, just licensing incompatibilities that were found out (just like some
> AAC library was later found to re-utilize reference code which was not under
> a friendly license).
>
> Then if we look at what the nonfree option is currently utilized for:
>
> capture card hardware integration (1):
> decklink
>
> open source that just happens to have incompatible licensing with regards to
> GPL (3):
> libfdk_aac
> openssl
> libtls
>
> (old) CUDA SDK things (3):
> cuda_nvcc
> cuda_sdk
> libnpp
I thought there were more..
> Thus looking at both historical point of that option, as well as its current
> uses,
> I don't see there's any reason to include a wrapper for a closed source
> scaling
> library that does not benefit the project (it re-implements already existing
> capability).
[...]
An answer, too good to contradict, unfortunately ;-)
Even free from ideology. Much respected.
Thanks,
softworkz
_______________________________________________
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".
