[FFmpeg-devel] Compromise

Stefano Sabatini stefano.sabatini-lala
Fri Feb 4 09:09:29 CET 2011

On date Friday 2011-02-04 01:56:11 +0100, Michael Niedermayer encoded:
> Hi
> Latest discussion of our compromis on publically logged #ffmpeg-devel without
> comment
> <michaelni> hi mans, ben said i have to reconcile with you for any compromis
> <michaelni> iam not so much interrested to join you guys than iam concerned about the community spliting up and leaving both sides
> <michaelni> ping mru
> <mru> explain "compromise"
> <mru> so far the only hints you've let slip have been totally unacceptable
> <mru> and "ben said ..." doesn't exactly convince me you understand what this is about
> <michaelni> compromise = "roots replaced by neutral people, stef,me,carl,reimar,baptiste joining commiters, clarification of leadership of new team, clarification of file maintainers vs commiters, some vission doc that lists goals of ffmpeg)
> <mru> unacceptable
> <michaelni> that is the idea for discussion
> <michaelni> what part?
> <mru> all of it
> <michaelni> you dont want to clarify how the new maintainers are lead?
> <mru> first of all, what has "root" got to do with it?
> <michaelni> 1 person, democraty, consensus?
> <michaelni> root abused their power to allow this without public discussion and vote
> <mru> oh but there was
> <mru> in october there was a vote
> <mru> the outcome was that you got to stay under certain conditions
> <mru> you failed to live up to those conditions
> <mru> these are now the consequences
> <iive> mru: you can't count?
> <mru> deal with it
> <michaelni> i did not fail the conditions
> <mru> iive: I can count to 5 and then kickban you
> <mru> michaelni: I can see this is pointless to discuss further
> <michaelni> besides there was a majority that unconditionally wanted to keep me
> <mru> I will not reply again
> <michaelni> as you wish
> <iive> mru: what would you wish michael to do, in order to accept reconciliation?

I believe some form of "compromise" undersigned by both parts is
necessary to get through this situation and focus again on development
and administration in a sane way, so I believe some condition should
be settled and accepted, especially from the "offending" part.

As for what regards the "clarification of leadership of new team,
clarification of file maintainers vs commiters, some vission doc that
lists goals of ffmpeg", I believe this is fundamental, not only for
Michael, but also for all the past and present and future contributors
of both sides, and is consistent with the aim of a "productive, fair
environment" for all of them.

As for what regards the infrastructure administration, I recognize
there is the right of the people who are paying for them to have some
form of control on them. Ideally infrastructure expenses should be
funded by the foundation and its administration should be regulated
somehow, this is for avoiding the concentration of too much power and
control over few key people, I hope you agree this is fundamental for
the health of the project.
FFmpeg = Fabulous and Freak Mysterious Pitiful Evanescent Gangster

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list