[FFmpeg-devel] Regarding Git Tooling

[Niklas Haas]

On Tue, 21 Jan 2025 03:41:06 +0100 Michael Niedermayer <michael at niedermayer.cc> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 02:26:24AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 02:39:29PM -0600, Marth64 wrote:
> > > Hello, in the context of a GA member,
> > >
> > > I think there is general interest in modernizing technical tooling
> > > specifically regarding ML/patch workflow vs. integrated git solution.
> > > Both have their merits. I think what we have today is optimized for
> > > some but cumbersome for many. Like shopping for a drill, it is good to
> > > step back from time to time and ensure we have the right tools.
> > >
> > > I think the problem statement of productivity being impacted from
> > > outgrowing the current tooling is different from who is hosting it.
> > >
> > > These are some options I noticed interest in (in no particular order):
> > > - Forgejo
> > > - GitLab
> > > - Mailing List/Patch Workflow (current solution)
> > >
> > > If we evaluate this as choosing a software appliance and put aside
> > > "who is the host" I think we can have a good discussion. There could
> > > be value in coming to consensus on one step, then moving on to the
> > > next.
> > >
> > > The goal is not to spin around on which tool is better but I am wondering,
> >
> > > - What other options would the community consider and any relevant pros/cons?
> >
> > I dont know why the options are exclusive. One can add a Forgejo on ffmpeg.org
> > but leave the Mailing List/Patch Workflow in place for cases where the
> > maintainer or patch author prefers a ML workflow.
> >
> > I mean just add an option and see what happens
> > Who uses it ?
> > do people submit patches to it ?
> > do people enjoy working with it ?
> > do people hate working with it ?
>
> also to elaborate because i have this feeling everything i say lately is
> misinterpreted
>
> if we have Forgejo + ML we can still decide to drop one later and use only
> one.

I think that this makes sense during a planned transition period, to give
everybody enough time to settle into the new system, but it should IMO only be
done with an explicit timeline for when ML submissions will be halted.

>
> THis was just a suggestion that seemed easier to agree with for everyone
> than a hard switch vs not switch.
>
> thx
>
> [...]
>
> --
> Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
>
> During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
> revolutionary act. -- George Orwell
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
>
> To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
> ffmpeg-devel-request at ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".