5 ms·
Totally their choice of course, and sorry for my luck, but it's LGPL.
by mbfg 4y ago
Totally their choice of course, and sorry for my luck, but it's LGPL.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- nsajko 4y agoWhat makes LGPL unsuitable for you? Is LGPL not a permissive license?
- CodesInChaos 4y agoIt is a copyleft license, but the copyleft is weaker compared to the GPL.
- mbfg 4y agoNo company of any significance would ever use it, for licensing issues. Now that is totally the choice of ffmpeg, and they are more that free to chose it. They may believe in the "all software should be free mantra", and again, that is totally fine. But it does significantly limit it's use, which again they may not care about.
- mkaic 4y agoBlender uses FFmpeg, and it's one of the most successful FOSS projects ever!
- mbfg 4y agoblender is open source.
- peterashford 4y agoI've certainly worked at companies which used LGPL software without any concern at all. Arguably, they weren't "significant" but they did examine the license and what it meant and felt it posed no risk.
- preisschild 4y agoLGPL doesn't require your software to be open source. You shouldn't have licensing issues with it.
- Lockal 4y agoFFmpeg is a part of Chromium and Chrome. That's it for "company of any significance would ever use it" statement. https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/third_party/ffmpeg/ https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/third_party/ffmpe... Also: All the giant companies used ffmpeg (2020) https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1258531455220609025 https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1258531455220609025
- mbfg 4y agoChromium is open source. Sorry, let me be more clear, no closed-source company of any significance is going to use LGPL.
- ddevault 4y agoLGPL plays no small role in its success. The only reason to be against it is if you wish to appropriate it for yourself.
- naikrovek 4y agolol it doesn't work this way. one person can't take it away from everyone else if it's, say, MIT-licensed. person A taking code private causes exactly zero harm to person B. this is why I say that viral licenses restrict freedom of users; they do not guarantee freedom to users. The GPL actively prevents users from taking certain actions -- actions which do not and can not take anything at all from any other user of that code.
- necheffa 4y agoPerson A taking a code base private that solves 95% of their problem and refusing to release fixes-and-features upstream hurts the entire community.
- naikrovek 4y agohow? exactly how? that person would not have even made the changes to GPL code. I won't work on ANYTHING GPL or AGPL because I don't want to be forced into doing anything. so how does that hurt the community? you're claiming ownership over code I haven't even written, now?
- bheadmaster 4y ago> how so? Three words: Embrace, Extend, Extinguish.
- naikrovek 4y agono, that's a straw man. you're making up events that are not part of this and acting as if they necessarily occur. they do not.