[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] Development model

Michael Niedermayer michaelni at gmx.at
Thu Mar 17 18:37:30 CET 2011

On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 06:22:56PM +0100, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
> On 17 Mar 2011, at 15:15, Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> wrote:
> > A quick question
> > 
> > What do people prefer
> > A. Reviewer applies patch if he is sure its ok
> > B. Reviewer ok-es patch and author applies later
> B, it happens often enough that I know the code better than the reviewer and realise (obvious) fixes necessary or that I really should add those comments I was too lazy for.
> However that should not be taken as a prohibition for reviewers or other developers to apply if they are impatient for some reason.
> I don't see any real issue with review happening also on the -cvslog list, it's sometimes all I have time to read so that will happen anyway (as with the JV demuxer), so why hinder people my making up many rules?

that wasnt intended as a rule

i just was curious what people would prefer.
as i had teh impression ok-ed patches simply where lost lately

Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

The real ebay dictionary, page 1
"Used only once"    - "Some unspecified defect prevented a second use"
"In good condition" - "Can be repaird by experienced expert"
"As is" - "You wouldnt want it even if you were payed for it, if you knew ..."
-------------- 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/20110317/34d6d999/attachment-0001.asc>

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list