[FFmpeg-devel] [VOTE] FFmpeg leader
Sat Oct 2 15:00:25 CEST 2010
On date Saturday 2010-10-02 13:41:59 +0200, Michael Niedermayer encoded:
> On Sat, Oct 02, 2010 at 12:39:11PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> > On date Saturday 2010-10-02 11:10:42 +0200, Reimar D?ffinger encoded:
> > > On Sat, Oct 02, 2010 at 11:00:06AM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> > > > I believe we agree that maintainers are free to apply patches on the
> > > > files they maintain, but in general there should be some exceptions to
> > > > this rule. Such exceptions may arise when:
> > > >
> > > > * the change affects the policy or the style of the project
> > > > * the change is no trivial, so it may benefit from peer-review
> > > > * the change affects other code not maintained by the committer *or*
> > > > the public interface
> > >
> > > Really, rules don't work here. It will just move the flaming to the
> > > interpretation of the rules.
> > > Of course we need some common view of how things should work in
> > > principle, but in the end the only thing that works is wanting
> > > to work together, taking into account criticism even if you think
> > > it goes too far without discussing forever who is right (unless
> > > you really think it goes far too far), and assuming the best intentions
> > > of the other side.
> > On the contrary I believe that would be important to settle the policy
> > once and for all, as one of the main reasons of this vote request is
> > related to policy violation and restrictions.
> > I believe most of us want Michael to stay as the project leader, and
> > we want Mans to continue to stay with his very much appreciated
> > contributions, so the problem is not related to the persons involved.
> > While I don't have nothing in particular to object to the FFmpeg
> > leader, I understand the point of Mans when he says that the leader
> > should abide the same rules that apply to the other developers, and I
> > can understand that this can't and shouldn't be literally true but
> > there should be some restrictions regarding his committing
> I asked several times, and i ask again
> which rule / part of the written policy has where been broken?
> now after mans you start discussing about policy violation, and i really
> think such accusation should be backed up by something
I never said that you violated the current policy. The problem is that
many feel like we should amend the policy, in particular regarding
some prerogatives of the project leader and of the maintainers.
FFmpeg = Fancy Freak Minimalistic Philosophical Elitist Gymnast
More information about the ffmpeg-devel