Hi Nicolas On Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 08:42:20PM +0100, Nicolas George via ffmpeg-devel wrote: > Hi. > > Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel (HE12025-10-16): > > I like that this would result in a steady income stream. > > I think its a good idea, and iam happy to provide companies with > > extended security support on old releases. > > I think it is naïve for nerds like us to expect being able to interact > with companies and coming out ahead. They would sic their lawyers on us > to make sure they have warranties that we deliver what they want.
We have people in the community who have experience with company stuff [...] > > I mean, We have companies who want releases (cant say who and what > > exactly because its non public info) > > These companies will pay for releases, so someone will continue making > > releases. Its better if that someone is us, better for the quality of > > releases and better for our income > > Why should we care if the releases are good if we do not slap our names > on them? > > The core of the issue is that FFmpeg is a Libre Software project, not an > Open Source project: it is before anything else the work of people in > their free time to make beautiful code, not the work of a company that > is planning to eventually turn a profit. This is important also for our > own freedom to experiment, to write code differently, to take the risk > of failing. > > What you propose effectively turns FFmpeg into a company in all but > legal status. That would be detrimental to our freedom to experiment, > and eventually to the quality of the code. Not counting being halfway > between two status, i.e. getting the problems of both. I care about money, so i dont have to care about money You can either A. work 40h a week to make enough money to live and use the remaining time to build beautifull code B. be rich enough so you can fulltime build beautifull code C. work 40h a week building beatifull code We want to achieve something between B and C here If we can get about 2M$ / year in donations then maintaince of FFmpeg can be funded. Why do we want to fund it ? Because we need more manpower, we need people spending more time working on FFmpeg. If you can make it happen without $, please do How unrealistic is funding some of the maintaince ? Lets do a quick check, almost everyone on this planet uses FFmpeg in some form (youtube alone has ~3 billion users) imagine each of youtubes users gives FFmpeg 1 cent once in their life instant 30million $ invest in S&P500, subtract inflation you get a fresh 2M$ each year. While this is a thought experiment, if everyone who used FFmpeg gave us 1 cent once in their life we could fund FFmpegs maintaince indefinitly. With zero requiremets, we would be 100% free to choose what to work on. Above is not a plan, its just to show the scale of what we need. thx [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB The real ebay dictionary, page 1 "Used only once" - "Some unspecified defect prevented a second use" "In good condition" - "Can be repaird by experienced expert" "As is" - "You wouldnt want it even if you were payed for it, if you knew ..."
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
