On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 10:07:49 (CET), Fabian Greffrath wrote:

> Am 12.11.2010 08:09, schrieb Reinhard Tartler:
>> I'd suggest to wait for lame to be ACCEPTED or REJECTED. ftp-master
>> seems to consider it unredistributable licensewise. Or port the pd-libs
>
> Is this because of the two extra clauses that Andres mentioned? IMHO
> they do only add more freedom (clause 1) and ensure that LAME is not
> used to enforce patents (clause 2).

The second would be compatible with GPLv3, but not GPLv2. lame does not
grant an upgrade to GPLv3.

>> to libavcodec and hope that someone finally finishes Michael's mp3
>> encoder.
>
> Yes, but LAMe is still *the* OSS MP3 encoder. For example, I remember
> that libavcodec implementations of AAC encoding and decoding suffered
> from regressions if compared to FAAC/FAAD2.

FAAD is a pure decoder.

FAAC is also rather questionable licensewise, and contains quite some
material from the reference aac implementation. cf. also with this bug:

https://launchpad.net/bugs/374900


-- 
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4

_______________________________________________
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Reply via email to