[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 1/2] lavfi: add FFFrameQueue API.

Michael Niedermayer michael at niedermayer.cc
Fri Dec 23 02:12:35 EET 2016

On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 07:10:39PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> On 12/22/2016 2:16 PM, Nicolas George wrote:
> > Le duodi 2 nivôse, an CCXXV, James Almer a écrit :
> >> You still have time to address the arguments from wm4's review you
> >> skipped in your previous reply. You only sort-of answered to the "Is
> >> all this complexity really justified?" question.
> > 
> > All the rest was only sub-questions to the big one: details about the
> > complexity. My answer stands: yes, all this complexity is justified,
> > every bit of it.
> > 
> > If you, or anybody else, want explanations on a certain detail, you can
> > ask, and I will answer.
> > 
> > If wm4 wants explanations, "get used to disappointment".
> > 
> > Or, to state it a different way: I consider "yes, all this complexity is
> > justified" to be the definite answer to all of wm4's remarks in this
> > discussion. If anybody else thinks some of wm4's remarks need
> > addressing, make them your own. From my point of view, wm4 no longer
> > exists in this discussion.
> Then you're not addressing them, and this patch was pushed while a blocking
> review remained unaddressed.
> The proper course of action now would be to revert this commit. Unless of
> course you decide to finally addressed his review. And I'm not saying you
> have to unconditionally change your code, simply addressing his arguments
> and explaining why the code is ok as is would be enough, assuming your reply
> and arguments remain unchallenged.
> Basically, the usual stuff when dealing with a review, something you have
> done plenty of times before but seem determined not to this time.
> You need to learn how to work in an collaborative project, and general
> environments where you have to interact with people. You have no right to
> ignore another dev's review and even go as far as state you'd consider his
> arguments if they were made by someone else.
> Your behavior is simply unacceptable and should be grounds for removing
> your pushing rights at the very least.

I wish everyone would work together, its christmess

also 2 things here
1. Is there a technical problem in the code in git ?
2. Is there a non technical problem ?

both should be solved somehow! People should work together to solve
all issues!

3. Is there a disagreement on how to do something technical ?

If so i belive that the people activly working on the code in
question (called the maintainers) should make a decission

4. If people belive we need rules to ban developers, then they should
   start a discussion and vote about such rules when everyone is calm
   and rational (not now and never about individuals but a rule that
   everyone is equally subject to).

everyone, Love more, hate less, please!

Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

There will always be a question for which you do not know the correct answer.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20161223/2ec92b0e/attachment.sig>

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list