On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 8:38 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde <gajja...@mit.edu> wrote: > On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Michael Niedermayer > <mich...@niedermayer.cc> wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 08:18:36PM -0500, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote: >>> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 8:15 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde >>> <gajjanaga...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > [...] >>> >>> Nothing new here, just moved the copyright to the top of the file to >>> satisfy some legal requirements I am completely unaware of, don't know >>> why an inline copyright does not work. Anyway, I don't want to spam >>> the ML with this kind of boring stuff, but Carl has objections to the >>> patch until the legal stuff is sorted out. >> >> the patch LGTM but iam a developer not a lawyer ;) > > Will give Carl another day (he was on vacation, don't know if he is > back), but I don't think it is worth waiting beyond that - all > important legal aspects are covered: boost license for relevant > function which must explicitly be there verbatim, and copyright > notice. Where to place them is really secondary - I have seen FOSS > projects with such copyright given "inline" if it is for a single > function.
pushed after above delay, thanks. > >> >> [...] >> -- >> Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB >> >> Let us carefully observe those good qualities wherein our enemies excel us >> and endeavor to excel them, by avoiding what is faulty, and imitating what >> is excellent in them. -- Plutarch >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ffmpeg-devel mailing list >> ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org >> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel >> _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
