[FFmpeg-user] "documented implicitly" part 2 [was: Re: Problem while converting DNG sequnece to video file]

Phil Rhodes phil_rhodes at rocketmail.com
Fri Aug 21 11:57:43 EEST 2020

 On Friday, 21 August 2020, 08:49:13 BST, Jim DeLaHunt <list+ffmpeg-user at jdlh.com> wrote:
> I believe a lot of the FFmpeg developers do read this list.
Yes, and I think they hold this sort of discussion in nothing but complete scorn.
> We are holding a mirror up to the project, and inviting them to take a look.
I don't think they care, or if they do, only in the sense of becoming angry that people are bringing up things they'd see as a criticism.
> In due time I think project participants may see something they perhaps don't look at often.
It's been like this effectively forever; certainly for more than a decade. They don't care. They really don't. It's an ego thing; any suggestion that the project needs something that it doesn't have is seen as a criticism and responded to with anger.
> Maybe they will want to stop what you rightly describe as "massively [reducing] the value of the work they're doing."
They don't see it that way. They simply write off anyone who doesn't fully understand the software as stupid or lazy, because that allows them to maintain the belief that the project is perfect and incapable of improvement.
Yes, it's catastrophically stupid, completely unnecessary, and terribly sad, but I don't think there's much that can be done about it. Honestly, ffmpeg works for most of the things I do with it so my interest in trying to move the mountain is limited.

ffmpeg-user mailing list
ffmpeg-user at ffmpeg.org

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-user-request at ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".  

More information about the ffmpeg-user mailing list