[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavc: remove the QOA decoder

[Vittorio Giovara]

On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 3:05 PM Paul B Mahol <onemda at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 8:43 PM Tomas Härdin <git at haerdin.se> wrote:
>
> > ons 2023-12-20 klockan 20:11 +0100 skrev Michael Niedermayer:
> > > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 05:57:40PM +0100, Tomas Härdin wrote:
> > > > tis 2023-12-19 klockan 15:02 +0100 skrev Nicolas George:
> > > [...]
> > > > [...] , but every line of code
> > > > carries with it a non-zero maintenance burden
> > >
> > > Assuming you mean with "non-zero" a "larger than zero" maintenance
> > > burden
> > >
> > > then we can proof this to be false
> >
> > Doubt
> >
> > > What iam trying to say is, the maintaince burden resulting from a
> > > change
> > > is complex
> >
> > Indeed
> >
> > > In this specific case here we have a patch proposing the removial of
> > > a decoder
> > > missing a test.
> > > Its easy to say the burden is less when the decoder is removed
> > > But its author recently left the project too
> >
> > This is one problem. But the careless attitude to shoving more features
> > into the codebase is far more serious. Every line of code is a CVE
> > waiting to happen. Apparently this is a difficult thing to grasp for
> > some contributors. It's an attitude I expect only from junior
> > developers.
> >
> > Ensuring C code is correct and safe is *hard*. I have spent time
> > formally verifying embedded C code for spaceflight. The lessons learned
> > from this has made me supremely suspicious of cowboy coding.
> >
> > I have raised this issue multiple times in this project to no avail. I
> > do not expect things to change.
> >
>
> Say what serious feature you contributed ? - Nothing.
>

Contributions to the process that makes us code better and keep higher
quality code are welcome.
Let's not fall into the trap of "no commits therefore your opinion is
invalid" way of thinking which only a fool would follow.
-- 
Vittorio