[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Enable swscale by default

Robert Swain robert.swain
Sun Sep 14 15:40:46 CEST 2008

2008/9/14 M?ns Rullg?rd <mans at mansr.com>:
> Diego Biurrun <diego at biurrun.de> writes:
>> On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 03:27:44PM -0700, Baptiste Coudurier wrote:
>>> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>> > I thought it was agreed in the droping of the old scaler thread
>>> > that whoever wants a lgpl scaler will have to do the work.
>>> I didn't agree _at all_ with that, and I will vote against.
>> While I surely do not want to fan the flames, this has been a long time
>> coming - I think it's time for the LGPL faction to stand up and work...
> Until last night, I was under the impression that the switch to
> swscale would only be done when the mmx parts were separated from the
> main code, and an lgpl version could be built.  It would appear that I
> was mistaken, if not misled.  Making the scaler and colourspace
> converter gpl is effectively making all of ffmpeg gpl.
> I've already explained why I don't do any work on swscale: I cannot
> comprehend the code, and every time I've attempted to do anything with
> it, I've ended up breaking something.

Does Michael's document about swscale that he committed help at all?

> Michael wants swscale to be the default/only scaler.  It is thus his
> duty to get it into a shape worthy of that position.  He's made a good
> start, but the work is far from complete.  Luca has posted some
> patches to further clean it up, so why doesn't Michael work with him
> on getting these committed?  Then we'd have an lgpl swscale (albeit
> unaccelerated), and nobody should have any objections to dropping the
> old scaler entirely.

I don't agree that it should solely be Michael's responsibility.
However, if Michael is the only one who wants to push swscale into
trunk and people object to not being able to use it under LGPL, then
unless anyone else steps up to do it so Michael doesn't have to, it's
Michael's decision whether he wants to work on making it possible to
use swscale under LGPL or not. And if Michael doesn't want to do it
and no one else does it, then I guess it doesn't happen and we remain
where we are.

> I'd even go as far as suggesting we treat libswscale as a new
> submission, and subject it to all the scrutiny that has come to be
> standard procedure in FFmpeg.

I think that is fair.


More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list