GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 564232
Dual Licensing qtmux
Last modified: 2008-12-19 18:34:08 UTC
Uraeus proposed that qtmux should be dual-licensed under MIT and GPL. As we need all developers involved in qtmux to agree, I'm opening this bug so we can all discuss. I'm not a license expert (in fact, I know almost nothing about them), but Uraeus told me that it would make it easier to bundle qtmux with some distros. So I agreed that we should do this. Counter arguments are welcome also.
As another contributing developer, I also agree (to MIT/LGPL that is). I assume that was also meant above, as it is currently LGPL. On a practical note, let us say that if there no counter arguments or otherwise noted, it will be so committed in one week from now (give or take :)).
Oops. Yes, I meant LGPL.
No objections from me (not sure I commited anything copyrightable, but..)
Ok with me, too. Also need to hear from Jan.
Fine for me too
2008-12-19 Mark Nauwelaerts <mark.nauwelaerts@collabora.co.uk> * gst/qtmux/atoms.c: * gst/qtmux/atoms.h: * gst/qtmux/descriptors.c: * gst/qtmux/descriptors.h: * gst/qtmux/fourcc.h: * gst/qtmux/ftypcc.h: * gst/qtmux/gstqtmux.c: * gst/qtmux/gstqtmux.h: * gst/qtmux/gstqtmuxmap.c: * gst/qtmux/gstqtmuxmap.h: * gst/qtmux/properties.c: * gst/qtmux/properties.h: Dual license qtmux LGPL/MIT. Fixes #564232.