[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/4] doc/developer.texi: extend the argument for submitting patches

[Michael Niedermayer]

On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 05:13:40PM +0100, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> Quoting Soft Works (2022-11-14 16:13:29)
> > > I did read your document, and my takeaway message from it is "doing
> > > it
> > > properly is too hard". As long as that continues to be your position,
> > > you might as well not bother.
> > 
> > This is ridiculous, and you know that. Or at least you would know
> > if you would have really tried to understand the problem.
> > 
> > And that unfortunately applies to some others as well. Nobody is 
> > willing to go deep enough to the point where it becomes clear
> > that a "perfect" solution would only be possible by making fundamental
> > changes to libavfilter, which are complex, risky and something
> > that would never be accepted from me, even when it would be 
> > the most excellent solution.
> 
> Stop with the drama, please. You are not a persecuted misunderstood
> genius. Nobody here has a personal grudge against you. The reason
> people, including me, are objecting to your patches is that they are not
> fundamental enough. You want to redo the subtitle API in a major way,
> but keep it saddled with legacy hacks right from the start. We have
> enough of those already to know we don't want any more.

Maybe people should take a step back and together discuss with softworks
what changes need to be done.

This thread is a bit odd becasue from reading just it its very clear there
are objections but what exactly needs to be done to move this forward is
not so clear (to me at least).

I think a patch review should result in a clear list of things that need
to be done.
Then these things can be gone through one by one. What can be done what not
where there is consensus, where not and why ...

If a request to a fundamental redesign is there then thats what it is
and maybe noone will do it but IMHO it should be clear so everyone understands
what is requested

As it is, this thread simply makes me sad because its deadlocked, there is
some will and effort on one side and that isnt directed into anything that
goes into the ffmpeg codebase ...

thx

[...]

-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

If you fake or manipulate statistics in a paper in physics you will never
get a job again.
If you fake or manipulate statistics in a paper in medicin you will get
a job for life at the pharma industry.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20221114/e2560455/attachment.sig>