[FFmpeg-devel] Donations and what happens with them
Thu Jan 27 00:54:28 CET 2011
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 04:28:18PM -0500, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Baptiste Coudurier
> <baptiste.coudurier at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 01/26/2011 10:58 AM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Reimar D?ffinger
> >> <Reimar.Doeffinger at gmx.de> ?wrote:
> >>> Also I am somewhat amused by the fact that the quickest way
> >>> to get something in would be to ask some proxy to submit the
> >>> patch for you and then ok it yourself, silly or not that just
> >>> feels wrong.
> >> Right, because we are not to be trusted.
> >> Come on, do you know how ridiculous this all sounds? Let's get some
> >> work done again.
> > Well, not requiring the official maintainer's approval seems ridiculous to
> > me.
> That I agree with, and for stuff that is actively maintained I will
> likely keep deferring to the respective maintainers before I commit -
> I've seen Mans and Janne doing similar things with stuff Kostya
> developed (and probably other examples also).
they only do that for people on their team, they applied about maybe 100
patches (pure cosmetic bikeshed stuff no end user value) to my code without
> I know you know much more about certain aspects of FFmpeg than me, and
> you do a good job at maintaining them. I'd be an idiot not to ask for
> your opinion.
iam not complaining about you ronald it wasnt you who did that random
meaningless changes to my code.
But then thats just what was quoted of IRC, an attempt to keep me from pulling
is that the new maintainer style?
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
Opposition brings concord. Out of discord comes the fairest harmony.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the ffmpeg-devel