On 2025-11-13 06:50, Timo Rothenpieler via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
On 13/11/2025 04:06, Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
Hi Kieran
On Wed, Nov 12, 2025 at 12:09:00AM -0800, Kieran Kunhya via
ffmpeg-devel wrote:
On Mon, 10 Nov 2025, 19:00 Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel, <
[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Remi
On Mon, Nov 10, 2025 at 06:03:38PM +0200, Rémi Denis-Courmont via
ffmpeg-devel wrote:
Le lauantaina 8. marraskuuta 2025, 10.34.24 Itä-Euroopan
normaaliaika
Thomas
Dullien via ffmpeg-devel a écrit :
What's the best way to submit these patches? There is the bug
tracker,
there is this mailing list - what's the best way to contribute
them?
I don't think that DNN-generated patches are compatible with the
LGPL in
the
first place, or it is at best very uncertain that they are. So then
you
cannot
contribute DNN-generated patches in any useful way at all.
If you have concrete legal analysis or case law that supports this
claim,
please share it.
If an LLM was trained on the leaked Microsoft Windows source code and
it
used elements of that code when asked to write an FFmpeg patch, would
that
patch be acceptable in your eyes?
If a human was trained on the leaked Microsoft Windows source code and
he
used elements of that code when asked to write an FFmpeg patch, would
that
patch be acceptable in your eyes?
We should forbid human written code?
I mean, that is in fact generally how situations like that are handled.
At least I have seen it multiple times on Projects like the Dolphin
Emulator that people who read the leaked Nintendo code were barred from
ever contributing again once found out, cause it would give Nintendo
legal ground to take down the project.
the small fixes to regular code in ffmpeg wont be fixed with 1000 lines
of windows/nintendo source code so its a bit of a moot point.
-compn
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
