[FFmpeg-devel] IRC meeting on Saturday 2015-09-12, UTC 15:00

Yayoi Ukai yayoi.ukai at gmail.com
Sat Sep 12 10:44:48 CEST 2015

FYI: Here is my experience with Python.org

Step 1: If it the decision is not so important (simple patch etc.) and
if 3 reviewers say yes, it will be merged.
Also, it seems there are no maintainers for specific parts of the
code, but instead they have "reviewers" and only
reviewers can review the patch. And once they approved the patch, the
patch will be submitted automated system
and "reviewers" do not merge the patch by themselves.

Step 2:
If it is decided that the patch or change is worthy of escalation, it
will be reviewed by more people. (I recall 6 but I am not sure)
and they vote. (I am not sure which condition justify escalation.)

Then, they will repeat the voting and escalation process and the final
decision is made by a vote
of  the "committee" (majority rules, I am also not sure how they
choose the committee etc.
the python.org person might have told me but I don't remember..)


I got really confused when I first came to FFmpeg. I thought it would
be very similar to Python,
and I didn't know that an Open Source Free Software Project could be
run so dramatically different..
but it made sense though.
and I see a lot of good things about the existing FFmpeg system too..


I think deciding point would be.. (I am just summarizing what is
discussed so far.)

- Deciding what events or arguments can causes/trigger the escalation.
(I guess it means when do you need more than arguing over the email?)

- Once it is decided to be escalated/vote, how the vote leads to the
decisions. (majority rules or veto rules?)
(and who qualifies to vote for after escalation?) (Well, basically
current patch review is
everyone votes right?)

- Well, you can always try one and you can come back later to see how
well it is working.
(you need to test any system so...and there will be one problem in one
system and the other (oh democracy..).. so..
You can see how happy you are and come back next year..or next time.
now your guys are leaderless by the leader's own decision and your
guys are pretty okay.. so i think
you are fine. :)  )



On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 6:11 AM, Ronald S. Bultje <rsbultje at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 8:46 AM, Nicolas George <george at nsup.org> wrote:
>> Le quintidi 25 fructidor, an CCXXIII, Michael Niedermayer a écrit :
>> > I have a few problems with using the UN security council as
>> > comparission
> [..]
>> The project needs a way of making a decision when people do not agree.
> +1, that's exactly what I meant.
> (Thank you for putting it into words.)
> Ronald
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list