[FFmpeg-devel] Voting committee
gajjanag at mit.edu
Mon Sep 14 19:04:19 CEST 2015
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Nicolas George <george at nsup.org> wrote:
> L'octidi 28 fructidor, an CCXXIII, Nicolas George a écrit :
>> I have been thinking of a practical proposal myself, I will word it and post
>> it shortly.
> Here it is. Please comment.
Looks mostly good to me. One thing I think that should be clarified is
the meaning of "linear combination" - I assume you meant a non-trivial
(exclude all zeros) linear combination over the nonnegative integers?
As you rightly point out; any criterion can be gamed. However, I still
think it is important to be precise about the criterion.
>> I strongly think that we will able to reach unanimous consensus about the
>> members of the second stage list, and clear consensus about the decision
>> rules. If that happens, there is no doubt this is legitimate.
> Better comparison: bootstraping a compiler rather than an OS. Unanimous
> consensus on the list of current developers is like reaching the fixed point
> where the compiler can compile itself into the exact same binary.
> I really think we can achieve it. We just need to keep minor personal
> dislikes for ourselves. Maybe I think that Someone is a complete idiot, but
> if the other developers that I trust and respect do not think so, I should
> shut up for the sake of unity; after all, it's just one person, it will not
> derail the project.
Just to add to this: I think it is important for all of us to remember
that almost everyone here wants to improve something/get something
fixed, and AFAIK we don't have trolls who would derail the project.
Sure; some methods of achieving the respective goals might be bad, but
there could be a variety of benign reasons for this such as ignorance
of some finer aspects.
> Nicolas George
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
More information about the ffmpeg-devel