Patch Writing Guidelines? (was Re: [Ffmpeg-devel] [RFC] ffmpeg-windows mailinglist?)
Wed Aug 2 18:56:16 CEST 2006
On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 09:45:35AM -0400, Augie Fackler wrote:
> On Aug 2, 2006, at 9:19 AM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> >Can we come to some sort of consensus here? I propose that patch
> >senders do not take rejections personally or as dismissals of their
> >and on the other hand FFmpeg reviewers make an attempt to explain the
> >reasoning behind patch rejections in a clearer fashion that points in
> >the way of acceptable solutions.
> Some general patch-writing guidelines might go a long way towards
> helping this. In particular, the configure vs. inline-platform-
> identifier is fairly nonobvious to those of us that are coming in
> with the express goal of making our platform work, that kind of patch
> (in general) seems to be what most projects expect (that said, your
> solution is infinitely nicer now that I understand it).
> I can't speak to other things that are nonobvious, but it's probably
> worth posting such things someplace on the site, perhaps with a link
> from the "Downloads and SVN" page?
> (maybe such guidelines exist but I never saw them?)
There is a developers guide, but it is not very visible I'm afraid. It
could also be extended somewhat:
I'm very open to suggestions what could be added there and how we could
display it more prominently on the web page.
More information about the ffmpeg-devel