[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] MAINTAINERS cleanup

Thilo Borgmann thilo.borgmann at mail.de
Sun Jun 12 12:39:49 CEST 2016

Am 11.06.16 um 18:35 schrieb Paul B Mahol:
> On 6/11/16, Michael Niedermayer <michael at niedermayer.cc> wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 01:55:01PM +0200, Clement Boesch wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 12:57:13PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>>> Hi
>>>> the MAINTAINERs file contains a bunch of inaccurate and outdated
>>>> entries.
>>>> What should be done about this ?
>>>> should we remove everyone who was inactive in FFmpeg
>>>> (aka no commit/author since 2 years) as in git log --first-parent ... ?
>>>> should we mark everyone above as inactive instead like "(inactive)"
>>>> shuuld someone send mails to everyone and ask if they stil maintain
>>>> the code they are listed for ?
>>> I'd say at most 30% of the file is still accurate, which means 70% of the
>>> file could be dropped. And then we'll see that it's so small the file is
>>> mostly irrelevant.
>>> Now I'd rather have the file used as a "community profile" to look for
>>> qualified people in the various area of the project; or said differently,
>>> keep only applications, misc areas, communication, generic parts entries.
>>> I feel like this file had for mission to be used as an argument to make
>>> sure people are indeed responsible for their code (as in "hey you're the
>>> maintainer of X, please review my patch"). Does it work? Did it in the
>>> past?
>> The file serves as the foundation of "who has/should have/needs
>> git write access" and who has op on IRC
>> (this works and worked)
>> It serves as a list of arbiters case of disagreement
>> (that wasnt used much at least not litterally)
>> Without a MAINTAINERs file git write access and irc op could become
>> more disputable
>> I do like the unwritten? rule of
>> "if you maintain some code you have the last word about it"
>> "if you maintain some code you have git write access"
>> "if someone disagrees about someone else maintaining then he better
>>  volunteers himself to do a better job"
>> Now, if you look at the people who left FFmpeg over the years, i
>> think in many if not most cases it involved prior conflicts with other
>> developers over the area they worked on.
>> so the idea of
>> "if you maintain some code you have the last word about it"
>> is IMO important, this doesnt strictly need a maintainers file of
>> course.
>> But many people work on what is fun for them, and while removing the
>> file or chageing its meaning doesnt directly change that, i think we
>> should be carefull to avoid creating a difference between the people
>> actively working on the code and the ones being in charge about the
>> code in question.
>> [...]
>> --
>> Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
>> Dictatorship: All citizens are under surveillance, all their steps and
>> actions recorded, for the politicians to enforce control.
>> Democracy: All politicians are under surveillance, all their steps and
>> actions recorded, for the citizens to enforce control.
> If this file is not going to be cleaned up it should be removed.

I think this file should be kept and updated from time to time. We can
very well ping some maintainers asking for reliability of their
maintainership and mark/remove their entries.

I also think every file of the source should be listed, even if there's
just an inactive or no maintainer. I was looking for people to ask
specifics and have been contacted by reference to that several times.
This file makes perfect sense to me.


More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list