There are projects which have switched. Many of the authors can be identified by the commits. If they were employed and made the contribution as part of their work, contacting the employee might be the best option. Also namy contributors may be connected you can get the help of colleagues to contact them.
LGLP: - You have to use the library as it is if you don't want to license the code as *GPL - Changing the API slightly might require the whole code to GPLed - You cannot just borrow some code than using the library - There are whitelisting issues for *GPL too GPL: - Nearly impossible to use in a commercial project This is a crucial library that the whole world depends on and not a commetilised product by one company. Hence it will be good if it can be made copy free (https://copyfree.org). S On Mon, 27 Nov 2023 at 23:33, Carl Zwanzig <c...@tuunq.com> wrote: > On 11/27/2023 9:50 AM, Suminda Sirinath Salpitikorala Dharmasena wrote: > > Is there a possibility to gradually move away from *GPL to a more liberal > > license? E.g. Apache 2.0 and/or MIT and/or BSD. > > That's unlikely as overall ffmpeg has contributions from many authors and > they'd all have to agree (also note the "non-free" compile option). > > While I'm not a big fan of the GPL, what restrictions does it impose that > are objectionable? > > z! > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-user mailing list > ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org > https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user > > To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email > ffmpeg-user-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe". > _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".