|
|
DescriptionMerge ffmpeg for M39 from upstream 5e3da256184e13502b3428f94e180888436d157b around 10 Sep 2014.
BUG=none
TEST=cq
Committed: https://crrev.com/eab98731cc2a2b23796a45ad06ed2496224e1897
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#296314}
Patch Set 1 #Patch Set 2 : checklicense #Patch Set 3 : switch to master #Patch Set 4 : next rev #Messages
Total messages: 24 (5 generated)
jrummell@chromium.org changed reviewers: + dalecurtis@chromium.org, wolenetz@chromium.org
PTAL.
Looks like you have some checklicenses failures on the bots, but all else looks good. It looks like its just a parse failure as the file is attributed with "GNU Lesser General Public License" which is the same as the rest of FFmpeg. I'd dig into checklicenses script and see if you need to white list this or fix a parser.
looks good for trying merge-m39 on bots; landing will need to include updated DEPS for the result of merging merge-m39 branch to master on chromium ffmpeg git.
jrummell@chromium.org changed reviewers: + phajdan.jr@chromium.org
Updating to include checklicenses change. phajdan.jr@, please verify the change in checklicenses.py.
Bots all look good, lets merge into master now.
Updated to use ffmpeg hash from master branch.
lgtm
jrummell@chromium.org changed reviewers: + thestig@chromium.org
+thestig@ for OWNERS review of checklicenses.py
I'm not a lawyercat so I am not qualified to say whether ffmpeg with GPLv3 is acceptable. nit: Please change the commit message to include some version numbers. "Roll FFmpeg DEPS" is too vague.
Is this really a lawyercat question? We already have many other third_party libraries w/ GPLv3.
On 2014/09/23 21:49:18, DaleCurtis wrote: > Is this really a lawyercat question? We already have many other third_party > libraries w/ GPLv3. There are a few, but it's not in the general WHITELISTED_LICENSES section. To me, that seems like they are exceptions.
Hmm, I think for now we'll just delete the one file which is having issues here then. We can resolve the license question at a later time when a branch cut isn't looming. FFmpeg itself has not changed and we are not passing --enable-version3 to configure, so we are only using GPLv2 or lower code.
On 2014/09/23 21:55:44, DaleCurtis wrote: > Hmm, I think for now we'll just delete the one file which is having issues here > then. We can resolve the license question at a later time when a branch cut > isn't looming. > > FFmpeg itself has not changed and we are not passing --enable-version3 to > configure, so we are only using GPLv2 or lower code. Ok, sounds good. Then presumably there's no checklicenses.py changes and you won't need my review. Please update the CL description once you figure out what commit you are rolling to.
John can you update the CL? efa2e5d00c218551242fa50931cd81332359a509 is the new hash.
jrummell@chromium.org changed reviewers: - phajdan.jr@chromium.org, thestig@chromium.org
Updated to new hash that avoids new license requirement.
The CQ bit was checked by jrummell@chromium.org
CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/591783002/60001
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Committed patchset #4 (id:60001) as d564b451e1e0284d42fffbf7c3726479f39e19f5
Message was sent while issue was closed.
Patchset 4 (id:??) landed as https://crrev.com/eab98731cc2a2b23796a45ad06ed2496224e1897 Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#296314}
Message was sent while issue was closed.
belated lgtm. |