[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] cmdutils: fix printing of codecs

[wm4]

On Thu, 8 Feb 2018 12:03:22 +0000
Rostislav Pehlivanov <atomnuker at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 8 February 2018 at 10:35, Nicolas George <george at nsup.org> wrote:
> 
> > Rostislav Pehlivanov (2018-02-08):  
> > > We should fix what we have right now. The API looks good too except some
> > > people here feel like they haven't bikeshedded enough and want to cause
> > > even more chaos.  
> >
> > Do you realize that sentence accuses Michael, Muhammad and me of
> > pursuing a personal power trip instead of seeking the good of the
> > project? Do you realize how incredibly insulting you are?
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > --
> >   Nicolas George
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> > ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
> >
> >  
> No, I was referring to you and you alone.
> You've been more insulting towards the people who do hard work and submit
> patches by going out of your way to block them and saying "The burden of
> proof is on you!". And by saying this you're basically not even wanting to
> review anything - you'd rather be spoonfed some facts than look at the
> code, figure out what it does, what it changes and seeing whether it's
> doing what its meant to do or not.
> If you want to be taken seriously and not be seen as someone as insulting
> as you think I was here then you should provide constructive criticism, use
> quotes, provide some information where you think there's an issue and
> finally propose an alternative. So far you've only done "I don't like this
> API and I can't be convinced otherwise!" and act surprised when your
> rhetoric to revert everything was criticized. Meanwhile mfcc64 provided all
> I just said and michaelni provided objective testing, so don't even compare
> yourself to them.
> Instead, why don't you send a patch or even a WIP of what you think ought
> to be done to the API?

You can add that his attitude sometimes leads to worse results too
(instead of better ones, as he argues). Like the UDP EOF change, that
ended in changing the libavformat API away from POSIX-like semantics in
a way that caused tons of bugs (and some are still unfixed). Now I
don't want to insult Nicolas or make him look incompetent in any way,
but this is an attitude problem that needs to be fixed somehow. (I know
he'll feel insulted by these words anyway - nothing you can do I guess.)