[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025

[Michael Niedermayer]

On Tue, Jun 04, 2024 at 08:24:57PM +0200, Vittorio Giovara wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 5:47 PM Cosmin Stejerean via ffmpeg-devel <
> ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org> wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > > On Jun 3, 2024, at 11:53 PM, 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
> > >
> >
> > If you really want to work on a proposal I'm happy to collaborate with you
> > offline to draft something and then propose it to the GA.
> >
> 
> Sure I'm happy to work on this with you! Let's talk offline about it

Why should discussions about a FFmpeg booth be offline ?

thx

[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

No great genius has ever existed without some touch of madness. -- Aristotle
-------------- 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/20240604/7f40d22c/attachment.sig>