[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] add acceptable licenses to development guidelines

[Måns Rullgård]

Diego Biurrun <diego at biurrun.de> writes:

> Since this has recently been a hot topic of discussion, I propose we
> publish an official list of acceptable licenses, namely LGPL 2.1, GPL
> 2, both with an explicit "or any later version" clause or MIT.
>
> I'm attaching a draft of a patch.
>
> Index: doc/ffmpeg-doc.texi
> ===================================================================
> --- doc/ffmpeg-doc.texi	(revision 9603)
> +++ doc/ffmpeg-doc.texi	(working copy)
> @@ -1551,6 +1551,10 @@
>  
>  @enumerate
>  @item
> +   Contributions should preferrably be licensed LGPL 2.1, including an
> +   ``or any later version'' clause.  GPL 2 including an ``or any later
> +   version'' clause or MIT license are also acceptable.

I'd like to say that LGPL (or MIT) is preferred over GPL.  I don't
like for FFmpeg to get even more segregated license-wise than it
already is.  Cleanly separable parts that for whatever reason must use
GPL are acceptable, but this should not be a primary choice.

-- 
M?ns Rullg?rd
mans at mansr.com