[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Refactor Developer Docs, update dev list section

[Jim DeLaHunt]

On 2017-11-22 15:40, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> 2017-11-23 0:39 GMT+01:00 Derek Buitenhuis <derek.buitenhuis at gmail.com>:
>> On 11/22/2017 11:34 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>>> Please understand I am against removing the paragraph from the
>>> documentation because I believe it is a good idea if developers
>>> are subscribed to -cvslog.

Carl Eugen: Thank you for responding clearly to the policy question I 
asked.

You think it is a good idea for "developers" are subscribed to -cvslog. 
Others on this list clearly are comfortable with some contributors, 
maybe not the maintainers but just contributors of new features and bug 
fixes, not being subscribed to cvs-log. We could perhaps clarify this 
policy, if all of you who have that authority would care to have that 
discussion and come to a consensus.

Personally, as a new contributor, I think a policy of requiring new 
contributors, and those who "just want to send a patch here and there", 
to subscribe to -cvslog is ridiculous. The message volume on -devel is 
already torrential. The message volume on -cvslog would be about double 
that. And, from what I see in the archives, I don't understand how the 
traffic on -cvslog would add value beyond what I already file unread on 
-devel.

My opinion as someone considering whether to spend effort fixing what 
look to me like shallow bugs in the FFmpeg documentation, or investing 
my effort in another project, is that requiring me to subscribe to 
-cvslog would be a reason to give up on trying to comply with the FFmpeg 
project's demands. The ratio of gratification to effort would be too 
discouraging.  But, I'm just a newbie, and this policy decision is yours 
to make, not mine.

>> Perhaps it can be reworded a bit to say it's encouraged for the
>> cited reasons, but not mandatory if you just want to send a patch
>> here and there?
> If that really helps anybody, please do so!

OK, I will modify the patch to include a new @Subheading describing 
subscription to ffmpeg-devel as in the current patch, and retaining a 
reworded version of the current @Subheading describing subscription to 
ffmpeg-cvslog as "encouraged for the cited reasons, but not mandatory if 
you just want to send a patch here and there" as Derek puts it. I won't 
get to that edit until the weekend.

Derek, thank you for your intervention.

Best regards,
          —Jim DeLaHunt, Vancouver, B.C.

-- 
     --Jim DeLaHunt, jdlh at jdlh.com     http://blog.jdlh.com/ (http://jdlh.com/)
       multilingual websites consultant

       355-1027 Davie St, Vancouver BC V6E 4L2, Canada
          Canada mobile +1-604-376-8953