[FFmpeg-trac] #11194(avformat:new): image2 frame_pts integer overflow

[FFmpeg]

#11194: image2 frame_pts integer overflow
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
             Reporter:  Filip        |                    Owner:  (none)
                 Type:  defect       |                   Status:  new
             Priority:  normal       |                Component:  avformat
              Version:  git-master   |               Resolution:
             Keywords:  image2       |               Blocked By:
  frame_pts                          |
             Blocking:               |  Reproduced by developer:  0
Analyzed by developer:  0            |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by Filip):

 ''i sent this to ffmpeg-devel but it was rejected probs cos i unsubscribed
 too fast, so here it is''

 **some feedback from my experience contributing:**

 i wouldn't have minded to just be told no, you know? or to get help with
 the things i needed help with, like getting the compiler to include the
 library i was testing, or how long i was supposed to wait before pinging,
 or who was meant to take care of my patch. whether/how to make a test for
 this feature that had never had tests, whether to deprecate the several
 old apis and redo it properly, or do the non-breaking workaround that was
 eventually merged. i had my patch reviewed twice and then all those
 suggested changes and work overridden the third time, my deprecations
 tossed in favour of technical debt, and this apparently reset the review
 timeout counter. so it took overall 12 days to merge a very basic bugfix.
 the maintainer of the part i fixed gave non-answers as to whether it'd be
 merged and backported ("maybe"), when i could expect the release
 containing it ("at some point"). i don't know why it wasn't backported, or
 much else really. i don't know why it was a higher priority to fix fuzzer
 bugs than stuff that users were affected by.

 i'm aware you're aware of these problems, since i read the developer
 meetings.

 "other thing to consider: a patch that no one reviews, is it implicitly
 accepted after a bunch of pings or not? so far, that seems to be how most
 developers work"

 "Many (most?) patches are unreviewed. We should shepherd patches,
 especially by new / occasional contributors. Key change needed:  avoid
 leaving patches in limbo or ignored. Proposed process (rough):
 acknowledging patch(es) on receipt --> identify / designate reviewers -->
 alert reviewers as required --> ongoing engagement -->"

 "It's a self-reinforcing defect: fewer reviews --> fewer new contributors
 --> fewer reviewers --> fewer reviews"

 and it really needn't be said that any gsoc outreach will be undone by
 potential contributors under 30y/o being unable to work git send-email, or
 emails at all really, unable to get irc to work, unable to piece together
 plaintext diffs, or simply emotionally exhausted by feeling like they're
 burdening people with pings, waiting, forgetting, fretting over the
 optimal time to ping again. it's that feeling of being a nuisance that
 means i don't want a reply to this, will unsub and so you can do as you
 please with this email. my recommendation is that you can solve 2/3 of
 these problems by switching to gitlab or similar.

 thanks for merging my patch, but i do regret asking.
-- 
Ticket URL: <https://trac.ffmpeg.org/ticket/11194#comment:4>
FFmpeg <https://ffmpeg.org>
FFmpeg issue tracker