[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] libavfilter: temporarily remove DNN framework and vf_sr filter

James Almer jamrial at gmail.com
Fri Jul 27 20:09:40 EEST 2018


On 7/27/2018 12:07 PM, Rostislav Pehlivanov wrote:
> On 27 July 2018 at 15:11, James Almer <jamrial at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 7/27/2018 8:04 AM, Rostislav Pehlivanov wrote:
>>> Reference - IRC and j-b's earlier email.
>>> Coding style issues:
>>> DNNModel* ff_dnn_load_model_native(const char* model_filename)
>>>
>>> We never ever do stupid things like put the asterix first. The author of
>>> the patch should have known better and the patch should have been
>> checked.
>>> Even a glance could have told you its wrong.
>>
>> Tone it down. It's a style issue. New contributors don't always know
>> things like that and we always tell them to fix it. It's the reviewer
>> who should have pointed it out, and if they missed it then it's
>> harmless. It's not like he used a public suffix like av_, where it can
>> be a problem.
>>
> 
> It shows the code wasn't reviewed properly. These style issues are
> propagated throughout all the DNN framework, which was many thousands of
> lines of code and shows that not even a glimpse was spent on the actual
> code. We don't commit such huge patches without at least some form of
> review, even if months have passed and no one has bothered to yet.
> 
> 
> 
>>
>>> I described them in the sentence above.
>>> But I'm not willing to wait for a potential fix, and especially not for a
>>> whole bunch of them rewriting everything. The whole code needs to be
>> thrown
>>> out and thoroughly reviewed properly, by at least yourself and one other
>>> person, preferably before gsoc ends.
>>> You should start coordinating with your student on how to fix everything
>>> mentioned and then resend the patchsets once fixed. I'll apply the revert
>>> patch tomorrow.
>>
>> No, you wont. Not until this has been discussed.
> 
> 
> Yes I will, unless someone objects I still intend to. No one has yet.

I just objected, and Ronald is trying to find a way to solve this
without getting to the point of reverting.

You'll not apply this patch until there's a consensus, and much less
after a day just because you don't like it. This is a collaborative
project, and revert wars are not welcome.

> 
> 
> I don't know what got
>> to you but you're acting like someone pushed code that would get a cop
>> on your doorstep. Calm down for once in your life, you're seemingly
>> angry in every other email you write, and you're not helping making this
>> project a friendly place at all for new and old contributors alike.
>>
> 
> I didn't intend to sound such but nevertheless the facts I mentioned
> remain, and I can't really think of a way to present them better.
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
> 



More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list