[FFmpeg-devel] Integrating ffprobe into FFmpeg?

[Diego Biurrun]

On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 02:37:32PM +0100, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> On date Thursday 2007-11-15 13:47:23 +0100, Aurelien Jacobs encoded:
> > Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> > 
> > > On date Wednesday 2007-11-14 15:43:22 +0100, Alex Beregszaszi encoded:
> > > > > 
> > > > > You can spot the problem immediately using for example my tool ffprobe
> > > > > (http://sourceforge.net/projects/ffprobe) which shows for each audio
> > > > > nellymoser frame these informations (-show_frames):
> > > > 
> > > > What about importing that tool into ffmpeg?
> > > 
> > > I originally designed ffprobe to be a part of FF-mpeg (and indeed it
> > > shares code/design with it), and to me it would be still a good idea
> > > to integrate it in FF-mpeg (no code duplication, better integration
> > > with FF-mpeg and easier accessibility for the FF-mpeg users), if the
> > > others maintainers agree and are not too much bothered by the many
> > > problems it still has.
> > 
> > I don't know if adding some GPLv3 code in FFmpeg is such a good idea.
> > It would add to the licensing confusion.
> > I would personally prefer seeing it licensed under LGPL or at least
> > GPLv2 or later if it gets included in FFmpeg.
> 
> The licensing status of ffprobe is currently a mess (sorry for
> that). The COPYING file contains the GPL3 license, while the -L option
> shows the same license used by the libav* libraries according to the
> CONFIG_GPL symbol, while the *.[ch] files headers state the adoption
> of the LGPL.
> 
> In the case of inclusion in FF-mpeg, I'd change the license to LGPL to
> comply with the rest of the ff* tools (if possible, I hope so).

There is no need to "change" the license.  You have already released
your code under the LGPL v2.1+.

Diego