[FFmpeg-devel] [VOTE] drop support for using libav* compiled with mingw/cygwin in msvc
Wed Feb 27 13:16:24 CET 2008
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 10:28:48AM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 01:27:42AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:29:15PM +0000, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> > > Diego Biurrun <diego at biurrun.de> writes:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 01:59:45PM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > >> [...]
> > > >
> > > > Can we please have a bit more discussion before resorting to votes the
> > > > next time around?
> > Yes, sorry. This is the kind of thing that happens without a formal voting
> > procedure ...
> No. You simply called for a vote without allowing for previous
> discussion. Note that the discussion brought force a workable
> alternative solution.
> Voting should be the very last resort, always.
Also, the vote was about the MSVC breaking version (B) vs. the original (O)
the result was people preferred O over B. It did not say they would prefer
O over all other solutions, and i did not claim that it did say this.
That is if one looks at the alternative now in svn (A) our knowlegde of the
majorities preferrance is.
(O) > (B)
(O) ? (A)
(B) ? (A)
Thus to comply with the vote would mean to revert (B) if its still in svn, as
well as not replace (O) by (B) if (O) were in svn. It does not say anything
Thus there is also no problem with complying with the vote now in light of
the discussions and the actions taken due to the discussions.
If someone cares enough about the A vs. O case he can start a vote about it :)
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
Why not whip the teacher when the pupil misbehaves? -- Diogenes of Sinope
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the ffmpeg-devel