Soft Works (12021-06-05): > And I agree to that disagreement. Also we shouldn't start acting as if > the nonfree category wouldn't exist at all and everything that would > fall into that category would suddenly no longer be acceptable.
This is exactly what we should do. We should not have accepted code that links to non-free libraries in the first place. The only legitimate reason for the non-free option is for license incompatibilities between different Libre software licenses. > If there's an open source or native implementation available, this > should always receive precedence, but otherwise it's not a valid > argument IMO to reject based on some fictional future (= someday, > somebody might contribute a native implementation). The Libre software movement has achieved so much thanks to people who have rejected this kind of compromise. But now people are taking it for granted, and it loses ground to Open Source, where software giants get free work without giving anything in return beyond token contribution and quasi-proprietary code. Regards, -- Nicolas George
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
