[FFmpeg-devel] Maintainership question

[Nicolas George]

Le quartidi 24 pluvi?se, an CCXIX, Ronald S. Bultje a ?crit?:
> Generally, yes. We sometimes forget a patch, and yes I have patches of
> you in my unread-mailbox waiting for me to have time to read them. I
> hope to get to them this weekend, they are overdue. I apologize for
> that.

Of course, I do not think anyone will begrudge the committers to forget a
patch in an overloaded mailbox.

> Sort of, technical arguments will have me delay the patch and I don't
> really do too many other personal dislikes on non-technical grounds.
> This is not a humanities field. :-).

I see. But let us assume that a Third person has reproaches against a patch
that can not convince either the Submitter to withdraw it or the Maintainer
to reject it. I suppose you will either consider the patch properly approved
or intervene in the discussion?

And the itchy part: does this still hold if the Third person is M?ns and
Maintainer is Michael?

If so, I think someone should commit

76ad67c  Implement guessed_pts in avcodec_decode_video2
d6705a2  ffplay: stats: do not dereference NULL video

(possibly sqhashed into one).

This would have the additional benefit of reducing the API and ABI
difference between the three.

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20110212/44ece050/attachment.pgp>