In Reference to Bad Rumors

[blue.brutal]

Look, I'm not trying to be a jerk, I'm really not - but claims are being made that kmplayer has violated GPL, and although you deny it, you state fiarly clearly that you're using Gabest's FLV Source. Since Gabest is the one who maintains the Guliverkili project and Media Player Classic, isn't that a GPL violation if you don't include the source code, proper credit, and modifications?

Honstly, I'm just curious - I am not trying to be a jerk. I often wonder why anyone would offer free software without making it open source.

[kyh96403]

Hi!
I am KMP's developer.
Lastest KMP includes Gabest FLVSplitter.ax.
Is it incorrect?
KMPlayer.exe does not include any gabest source code.
I attach gabest flv splitter's source what I used,
Please compare Gabest original flv source with it.

[edit, typo correction]

[z]

@burtal

No more joking here. I'd not like to speak in fun with you. Before claming GPL violation of kmp with relation to mpc, you should know that this had been already mentioned before long with gabest himself. And I think there was an explanation enough to be understood. As a matter of fact, because of gabest whom I respected, the ignorant is everywhere based on the comment made by him in his page. WE DID NOT TRY TO IGNORE ANY KIND OF ADVICE FROM GABEST. Although there was some mistake in the beginning as the gpl based libraries was not credited properly by omitting suitable documents, the problem is being corrected gradually.

So if you have any question, why don't you try to ask gabest? And I must say I've much disappointed with his manner afterward. After the last statement of our last conversation, I've expected the postings in his page be corrected but there is no action till now.

My patiences were almost drained by the insult without knowing anything about the structure of the player. What the hell are you knowing if it is not depended on the comment by gabest?

This is the same opinion as mine:
[Only registered and activated users can see links] ([Only registered and activated users can see links])
Software being opensourced does not guarantee you anything. First of all, there aren't many people who would be able to maintain AND improve such complex software (if there are any, they are probably working on something commercial - good so! talented people deserve to get paid well).

Second, I strongly believe in quality software and good project management - not just randomly adding a feature here and there and combining different programming styles without some sort of organization. More people working on the project does not necessarily mean higher quality.


PS. A thread like this will not be allowed anymore without proper authority to argue with.