[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] download: clarify Libav maintainership/committership status

[Michael Niedermayer]

On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 07:57:28PM +0300, Ivan Kalvachev wrote:
> On 6/25/11, Stefano Sabatini <stefano.sabatini-lala at poste.it> wrote:
> > On date Friday 2011-06-24 20:16:38 +0200, Michael Niedermayer encoded:
> >> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 06:27:45PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> >> > On date Friday 2011-06-24 17:37:16 +0200, Michael Niedermayer encoded:
> >> > > On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 04:01:33PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> >> > > > Use "Libav developers" for qualifying both administrators and
> >> > > > committers of the Libav fork.
> >> > >
> >> > > To the best of my knowledge this does not represent the truth
> >> >
> >> > Updated.
> >> > --
> >> > FFmpeg = Fabulous Fast Most Power Evanescent Game
> >>
> >> >  download |    6 +++---
> >> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >> > 271a3f550632298bdec490bbf630794144467357
> >> > 0001-download-clarify-Libav-maintainership-committership-.patch
> >> > From 428f2d6b014b1819d3fa802a7b73b030eec0cf05 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> >> > From: Stefano Sabatini <stefano.sabatini-lala at poste.it>
> >> > Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 15:39:01 +0200
> >> > Subject: [PATCH] download: clarify Libav maintainership/committership
> >> > status
> >> >
> >> > Use generic labels for qualifying both administrators and committers
> >> > of the Libav fork.
> >> > ---
> >> >  src/download |    6 +++---
> >> >  1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/src/download b/src/download
> >> > index 10bc053..f21acbf 100644
> >> > --- a/src/download
> >> > +++ b/src/download
> >> > @@ -51,9 +51,9 @@ developers and groups of developers are available.
> >> >      <td><a
> >> > href="git://git.libav.org/libav.git">git://git.libav.org/libav.git</a></td>
> >> >      <td><a href="http://git.libav.org/?p=libav.git">Browse</a></td>
> >> >      <td><a
> >> > href="http://git.libav.org/?p=libav.git;a=snapshot;h=HEAD;sf=tgz">Snapshot</a></td>
> >> > -    <td>?</td>
> >> > -    <td>8 developers</td>
> >> > -    <td></td>
> >> > +    <td>Libav administrators</td>
> >> > +    <td>Libav committers</td>
> >>
> >> thats a circular definition and IMHO worse than leaving the fields
> >> with "unknown" because it gives the impression that its known who
> >> the commiters & admins are
> >>
> >>
> >> > +    <td>Libav project (forked from FFmpeg)</td>
> >>
> >> ok
> >
> > Updated. I'll push soon if I see no more comments.
> 
> I think last time I asked there were 11 committers/pushers (identified by git).
> 
> I'm strongly against replacing "?" with "-".
> "-" would indicate that this field doesn't apply (like in the mirrors above).
> "?" indicates that there are some, but that information is not available/public.
> 
> I think I'll be OK to put both fields as "?".

id also prefer ? or unknown

[...]
-- 
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
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20110626/61c063b5/attachment.asc>