[FFmpeg-devel] [VOTE] Equality and leader team
Sat Feb 5 23:07:50 CET 2011
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 01:33:31PM -0800, Alex Converse wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 3:31 AM, Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> wrote:
> > Ronald, stated (see Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Compromise) that he does not
> > even want 10 new commiters this year.
> > It was said the new system is similar to the linux kernel, but really it has
> > nothing to do with it. Linus and Andrew have not been locked out of the
> > process by 7 of their friends and asked to send patches.
> > Nor are file maintainers locked out of their repositories where they worked
> > previously together.
> I was never your friend. You were hostile to me from the first time I
> ever sent an e-mail here.
i respect you because at least you are honest, and i honestly would like to
resolve our dislike for each other.
Things like variable names i asked to change in reviews where a mistake,
my mistake and id like to appologize for that.
> > Linux development is if it can be described in one word, evolutional, its
> > not forced by coups. And with disagreements and tools like git to which we
> > just very recently switched also comes the natural and gradual change to a
> > differnet development model of pulling changes and having more repositories.
> > Trying to force such a change while at the same time trying to push oneself
> > to the top of the pyramid is bound to lead to disaster in the long run.
> > In terms of stability, the new 7 commiter team commited a whole mail thread
> > by mistake
> > <BBB> huh?
> > <BBB> what happened
> > <mru> you put the entire quoted thread in the commit message
> > And broke compilation by apparently not bothering to test the code
> > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [FFmpeg-commits] wtv: filesystem implementation
> > These are things that where very rare before when everyone had write access.
> Are you kidding the build broke far more often under the old system.
we had the old tree for 10 years, the new for 2 weeks
> > And to quote ronald on what happens if you disagree with him:
> > "What happens if we disagree? I hope that we can come to a consensus.
> > ?Plus of course all the usual, what if I break the build? Etc., but
> > ?that's obvious. Yes I'm purposefully not going into the "what if we
> > ?can't come to a consensus", because I don't want to start another
> > ?bitchfight already."
> > Because of all these, iam starting a simple vote that is targeted to fix the
> > worst of it with the smallest change that appears to me sufficient.
> > The worst is that many people leave ffmpeg entirely. And i myself would have
> > done that too had i not been offered money for future work on ffmpeg.
> > * Disband the leader team of 7 and return commit and decission power to all
> > ?developers.
> > Y Yes
> > N No
> > Id like to emphasize that Y returns the power to all developers NOT return
> > any leader power to me.
> > I also repeat that this is not about changing the system, this vote is just
> > about removing an un-equality amongth the developers, it says nothing about
> > which system developers would experiment with, change to or finally keep.
> You can't stop a group of developers from having a shared tree with a
> vote. You already have your tree that operates under your rules. If it
> is a better system then surely your tree will gain more mindshare.
Its absolutely the 7 peoples right to have a fork with a shared tree but
if its the main ffmpeg tree on ffmpeg.org then the situation is different
and really i want to resolve the problems with this vote and make both sides
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing, and that is that I know
nothing. -- Socrates
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the ffmpeg-devel