Lame and Faad license ambiguity

[Baby Octopus]

Hi,

I understand Lame comes under LGPL. But why is it a part of ugly plugin?
Also, FAAD is covered under GPL. Why is it a bad plugin?

Can somebody through some light on this please?

Regards,
Jagadish

[Nicolas Dufresne]

Le lundi 05 novembre 2012 à 23:00 -0800, Baby Octopus a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> I understand Lame comes under LGPL. But why is it a part of ugly plugin?

Some of the plugin in ugly are there because they are patented. Lame
encodes MP3 which require licence, at least if you are a company.

> Also, FAAD is covered under GPL. Why is it a bad plugin?

Some plugins are in -bad because they don't have enough unit tests, or
they lack a maintainer to move them to -good.

regards,
Nicolas

_______________________________________________
gstreamer-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/gstreamer-devel

[Tim-Philipp Müller-2]

On Mon, 2012-11-05 at 23:00 -0800, Baby Octopus wrote:

Hi,

> I understand Lame comes under LGPL. But why is it a part of ugly plugin?
> Also, FAAD is covered under GPL. Why is it a bad plugin?
>
> Can somebody through some light on this please?

What Nicolas said, and:

http://gstreamer.freedesktop.org/documentation/splitup.html

Cheers
 -Tim

_______________________________________________
gstreamer-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/gstreamer-devel