[FFmpeg-devel] [MPlayer-legal] [VOTE] New root crew for mphq and new projectleader for FFmpeg
Sun Oct 3 19:52:44 CEST 2010
On date Sunday 2010-10-03 18:46:37 +0200, Michael Niedermayer encoded:
> On Sun, Oct 03, 2010 at 05:06:42PM +0200, Luca Barbato wrote:
> > Change of files maintained by other on purpose to annoy who maintains
> > that. In other projects such commit might grant a suspension of 2
> > months, not for the commit but for the spite...
> in mplayer of old times (aka before the whiners and bikesheds) a commit
> against rules led to a warning and a second to account suspension
> it worked well, noone did a 1-3rd person, asm doc removial, redundant stdlib.h
> inclusion commit as they would have had to send patches after the 2nd violation
> and few tried because they knew the consequences. But now and here such
> hard consequences are kinda unpopular and it seems to work fine in most cases.
> I think we arent yet at the point where we have to use such rules though.
> and if it comes to it that is the decission of the community or the leader
> not roots.
I agree with what Michael suggested, the root should possibly not be a
developer, at least he shouldn't be a developer which intentionally
violated the policy (we can mitigate this and limit the considered
period to one/two years).
Also it should be in control of the project leader to decide when to
suspend commit rights, it's reasonable to warn at the first violation
(yellow card?) and to suspend the second time for a variable period
(e.g. from three days to two months depending on the decision of the
project leader or on the type of violation). Such suspension shouldn't
preclude the possibility to continue to contribute/discuss in other
ways (e.g. by sending patches, posts or by reviewing patches).
Permanent suspension should be voted by the majority of the
committers, so shouldn't be decided by the single project leader.
FFmpeg = Fascinating and Friendly Monstrous Programmable Energized Geisha
More information about the ffmpeg-devel