[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 1/4] V14 - Adding SCTE-35 CUI codec

[Kieran Kunhya]

On Sat, 22 Oct 2016, 06:13 Rostislav Pehlivanov, <atomnuker at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 22 October 2016 at 01:17, Kieran Kunhya <kierank at obe.tv> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 21 Oct 2016, 20:05 Marton Balint, <cus at passwd.hu> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On Thu, 20 Oct 2016, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 05:36:27PM -0700, Carlos Fernandez Sanz
> wrote:
> > > >> From: Carlos Fernandez <carlos at ccextractor.org>
> > > >>
> > > >> Signed-off-by: Carlos Fernandez <carlos at ccextractor.org>
> > > >> ---
> > > >>  libavcodec/avcodec.h    | 1 +
> > > >>  libavcodec/codec_desc.c | 6 ++++++
> > > >>  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > Reviewed-by: Michael
> > > > LGTM
> > >
> > > Pushed with a minor whitespace fix.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Marton
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> > > ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> > > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
> >
> >
> > So all the objections to this patchset are now irrelevant are they?
> >
> > What a shameful way to run an Open Source project.
> >
> > Kieran
> >
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> > ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
> >
>
>
> That patch has been posted on the mailing list since July. You didn't reply
> to any patch to say why you think it's a bad idea. You just said that it's
> inappropriate once on IRC and didn't explain much as to why. You can't
> really expect to convince someone like that.
> The guy had to go through 14 versions to get something acceptable, which is
> one of the most I've seen, and the reviewers did have to do a lot of work
> to make it look fine. And I did look at the patch too and found nothing
> really wrong with it. In fact SMPTE KLV is implemented in a similar way.
>
>
> An open source project accepts a well reviewed patch, how is that shameful?
> Also mature projects are either dead or no one really uses/works on them
> willingly.
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel


http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2016-October/200644.html

The fact that the timestamps are unusable was never addressed. Just because
KLV is like that, doesn't suddenly make two wrongs into a right.

Getting patches merged by sheer attrition is a shameful way of "running" an
open source project.

Kieran