[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025

[Vittorio Giovara]

On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 2:02 PM Paul B Mahol <onemda at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 12:59 PM Vittorio Giovara <
> vittorio.giovara at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 12:09 PM Paul B Mahol <onemda at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 9:09 AM Vittorio Giovara <
> > > vittorio.giovara at gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 8:55 AM Paul B Mahol <onemda at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 8:53 AM Vittorio Giovara <
> > > > > vittorio.giovara at gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 3:01 AM Cosmin Stejerean via ffmpeg-devel
> <
> > > > > > ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Reposting my question/comment here since Thilo hasn't had a
> > > chance
> > > > to
> > > > > > > > respond, but shouldn't these kinds of requests go through the
> > GA?
> > > > If
> > > > > > > > anybody can do whatever they want with the ffmpeg name, then
> > > what's
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > point of voting and following the established process?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Probably? I'm not actually sure what the process is for getting
> > an
> > > > > FFmpeg
> > > > > > > booth at a conference. Is there a documented process somewhere
> > for
> > > > how
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > > should be done? If not this might be a good opportunity to
> create
> > > > one.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Agreed, do you have a draft you could share as a base of
> > discussion?
> > > > Once
> > > > > > defined, we could have the GA vote on it
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > It might also make for a good topic of discussion at VDD. For
> how
> > > > much
> > > > > > > drama there was about NAB on the list I was surprised there was
> > > zero
> > > > > > > discussion about it at FOSDEM.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There were probably more important topics to discuss and the
> > > lingering
> > > > > hope
> > > > > > that the problematic points would have been handled better than
> by
> > > > > calling
> > > > > > people trolls
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regarding the "or you" part, I wasn't involved in securing
> > > > sponsorship
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > NAB or IBC. I did volunteer to help with NAB because I happen
> to
> > > live
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > Vegas and I enjoy spending time with other ffmpeg developers.
> I'm
> > > > happy
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > help at NAB next year as well should it happen again.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Noted, it should have said "or anybody willing to host/help a
> > booth"
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have no plans to attend IBC and no involvement with the FFmpeg
> > > booth
> > > > at
> > > > > > > IBC. I am merely trying to correct the perception that NAB was
> > > > > > > cost-problematic, since no money was paid by the project for
> NAB.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't think anybody is suggesting that booths are
> > cost-problematic,
> > > > but
> > > > > > rather they are lacking in process (one shouldn't allowed use
> > ffmpeg
> > > > name
> > > > > > "just because") and in scope (aka "the why" and what kind of
> > results
> > > > are
> > > > > > expected by investing time in said booth)
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Said by prominent LibAV developer.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > reported to CC :)
> > > >
> > >
> > > CC is fully controlled by prominent LibAV developers.
> > >
> >
> > Not only is this factually incorrect, it's also unrelated to the topic at
> > hand. No worries, this infringement is being reported to the CC as well,
> > but please try to make an effort at doing better at least.
> > Thank you
> >
>
> Do not trust LibAV developers even when they are giving you gifts.
>

I'm not giving you anything, please can you stop? I don't want to flood the
CC with emails, but I'll do so if that helps stifle this kind of behavior.
Please disconnect, grow up, be nicer to your fellow community members, and
just do better.
Thanks
-- 
Vittorio