[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025

[Thilo Borgmann]

On 24.05.24 11:56, Andrew Sayers wrote:
> On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 03:49:58PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> Hi all
>>
>> Before this is forgotten again, better start some dicsussion too early than too late
> 
> This comment is inspired by the other subthread, but not directly in reply to it.
> I'm replying to this post rather than get in the middle of all that...

Thanks :)


> What happens if someone is hired to do a job that requires access to the ML,
> then gets involved in a situation where there's talk of a ban?
> 
> If they're banned, does that translate to suspension without pay?  With pay?
> 
> Banning such a person would jeopardise future funding - if they aren't banned,
> will people be concerned about the apparent conflict of interest?

Interesting and something we should think about.
I think the project's well-being should be the priority - meaning if we 
vote for a ban of someone that was trusted enough to get a contact from 
us in the first place, the ban should be executed - or any other measure 
the CC or GA sees fit. Giving a work contact to someone shall not make 
us dependent on that person to such an extent.


> In a wider sense, hiring a single person to do a job we come to rely on (like
> code review) gives the project a bus number of 1.  How would the STF react to
> a proposal like "we plan to do XYZ in 2025, but if we don't get funding for
> 2026, we'll drop Z and spend the time on a transition plan instead"?

Speaking as an idealist, we should uphold our procedures independently 
of what another entity (except the applicable law) thinks about our 
decisions.

Realisticly speaking, we already got some feedback from STF about such 
potential break aways on our end. Though these are of course never good 
in any such business relation, these things do happen. So up to a 
certain extend, it won't remove us from the program. Problems arise if 
such things are getting frequent.

We also got another layer of protection vie the SPI linked in between.
If we sanction someone severely who is in current posession of a 
contract to do some FFmpeg work, we might stop funding that and give 
another contract to someone who can take over.

Not saying that this could work with any kind of work but can be an option.

That brings me to the idea that we need to check the contracts for 
potential fail-safe clauses for such extreme cases like these.

Thanks,
Thnilo