[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Add tools/merge-all-source-plugins

[softworkz .]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces at ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Michael
> Niedermayer
> Sent: Donnerstag, 15. Mai 2025 17:27
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org>
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Add tools/merge-all-source-plugins
> 
> Hi Zhao Zhili
> 
> On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 06:58:54PM +0800, Zhao Zhili wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On May 14, 2025, at 18:55, Michael Niedermayer <michael at niedermayer.cc>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Simple script to merge all source plugins.
> >
> > I think this is confusing. The operation of merging multiple branches can
> hardly be considered
> > a plugin.
> 
> Each branch (well, there is just one ATM)
> 
> represents and contains exactly one plugin or you could also call it feature.
> merging that branch integrates that feature / plugin.
> 
> Its a very simple system, it achives many of the goals people have
> 1. simple
> 2. easy to maintain
> 3. it does not allow binary blobs without source
> 4. it allows people to develop code under their own rules
> 
> Let me elaborate on 4.
>     We are not a closed source company, people have the right to work on what
>     they want to work on. I think 99% of us agree here
> 
>     Fact is, this does not work in ffmpeg-devel currently, several people have
>     had their work rejected for non technical and non legal reasons.
>     We could remove the most aggressive people, that would reduce this issue
>     or we could support plugins (source plugins or classical plugins the
> details
>     dont matter as long as developers can develop their code on their own
> terms
>     and users can use them without censorship by someone)
>     We also could change the development model to be like linux where this
> problem
>     does not exist like this.
> 
>     So really, the way i think you should view plugins (and it could be a
> totally
>     different implementation of teh concept of a plugin than this here)
>     Is as a way to keep everyone in one team.
>     If we cant give people a way to develop code externally and still have
>     it accessible to users then we have to make it possible to develop
>     it inside ffmpeg. Or we will loose many new developers who all want to
>     develop something new and just cannot in this environment.
> 
>     That will lead to more conflicts and then the chance of people being
> kicked
>     out or leaving will also go up. And if 2 people disagree, the one who
> wants
>     to work should stay, and the one who wants to have a say in the work
>     of the other should leave. 

Couldn't agree more!


> Its the obvious way. A person working
>     vs a person objecting to work. Which way will a project move forward ...
> 
>     I want to work, I want everyone else to be able to work, I want everyones
>     work to be available to the end user.

+1

Thanks,
softworkz