[FFmpeg-cvslog] r23904 - in trunk: cmdutils.h libavcodec/aac_parser.h libavcodec/ac3.c libavcodec/ac3.h libavcodec/ac3_parser.h libavcodec/ac3tab.c libavcodec/allcodecs.c libavcodec/alsdec.c libavcodec/avcodec.h l...

Baptiste Coudurier baptiste.coudurier
Fri Jul 2 20:55:53 CEST 2010

On 7/2/10 6:26 AM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 05:44:22PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 04:16:49PM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 12:34:48AM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
>>>> On date Wednesday 2010-06-30 22:00:01 +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 09:08:04PM +0200, Vitor Sessak wrote:
>>>>>> On 06/30/2010 08:55 PM, Alex Converse wrote:
>>>>>>> 2010/6/30 M?ns Rullg?rd<mans at mansr.com>:
>>>>>>>> Michael Niedermayer<michaelni at gmx.at>   writes:
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 06:46:05PM +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Michael Niedermayer<michaelni at gmx.at>   writes:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 05:38:06PM +0200, mru wrote:
>> [...]
>>>>>   Would you let Diego dictate rules for
>>>>>>>> your asm code?  Didn't think so.  Now please allow the experts in each
>>>>>>>> area to do their job.  Your expertise is in writing fast C code, not
>>>>>>>> in English grammar.
>>>>>>> This is probably the wrong place to weigh in, but as a native English
>>>>>>> speaker I agree with M?ns here.
>>>>>> As a non-native speaker (we are the majority here, no?), I am strongly
>>>>>> against adding more english-related red-tape for getting code committed.
>>>>>> Really, getting comments that use good wording and have no grammatical
>>>>>> mistakes take time already, having to avoid _correct_ grammar forms is
>>>>>> just silly. I'm all for consistency, but it has a price and here I think
>>>>>> it is not worth it.
>>>>> That's why third person should be avoided, too.  It's simpler to write
>>>>> in impersonal form.
>>>> I agree with the purpose of the commit, but the way it has been done,
>>>> in open contrast with the rules of this community, is deprecable.
>>> Dunno what you mean by "deprecable".
>>> I'll go on record now that Mans asked me before committing and I told
>>> him to go ahead.  A JFDI attitude is sometimes better than endless
>>> bikeshedding.  The problem about this particular bikeshed is that it is
>>> a revolution of the great unwashed against the experts.
>> i politely request that you refrain from personal insults.
>> There is no need to call thouse who disagree with you "great unwashed"
>> Didnt we had enough flaming already?
> s/great unwashed/less skilled/ if you prefer, no personal insult intended
>>> FFmpeg is not about democratic decisions.
>> It is. And it always was.
> Nope, it is not and never has been, no matter what you claim.

It is, you are the one against it because you fear majority vote.

> Developers are *not* created equal around here.  Maintainers trump the
> commoners and your word has more weight than most others'.  Decisions
> usually get made by discussions among experts with the non-experts
> remaining silent.  Where no consensus can be reached seniority and
> standing are the decisive factors.

You are always talking about consensus when there was never any 
consensus at all in any controversial decision that has been taken.

> The last time I remember us voting about something was whether or not
> warnings should be fixed.  In the preceding discussion you were clearly
> outnumbered already, it took a 10-1 (or so, I don't remember exact
> numbers) majority during the vote to sway you.

What the fuck. You are in no position to speak like this when you 
imposed so many of your choices to the rest of team as well.
We voted for the removal of libamr, should I be mad because your vote 
won ? You are not expert AFAIK.

No I'm not, I respect the majority vote and every developer must.

Key fingerprint                 8D77134D20CC9220201FC5DB0AC9325C5C1ABAAA
FFmpeg maintainer                                  http://www.ffmpeg.org

More information about the ffmpeg-cvslog mailing list