[Ffmpeg-cvslog] r8204 - trunk/libavformat/mov.c

[Baptiste Coudurier]

Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> Hi
> 
> On Sat, Mar 03, 2007 at 10:44:10PM +0100, Baptiste Coudurier wrote:
>> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>> Hi
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Mar 03, 2007 at 04:00:08PM -0500, The Wanderer wrote:
>>>> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sat, Mar 03, 2007 at 08:48:35PM +0100, Baptiste Coudurier
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> You going to revert it for 2 lines of fourccs even more
>>>>>> when those 2 lines are mentioned in the commit log ?
>>>>> yes
>>>> <snip>
>>>> 
>>>>> btw, i didnt even realize that its 2 lines and that exactly
>>>>> is the problem with such commits you never know what really
>>>>> has been changed if cosmetics get mixed with functional
>>>>> changes
>>>> I read through the patch looking for the change described, to
>>>> make sure I wasn't incorrect before posting, and I was unable
>>>> to even tell with certainty (in a reasonable amount of time)
>>>> which lines contained the new tags - because the table was also
>>>> being rearranged by the same commit. As a result, I was unable
>>>> to be sure whether or not a non-cosmetic change had been made.
>>>> 
>>>> This is part of the reason for the rule against mixing
>>>> functional and cosmetic changes, and part the reason for the
>>>> rule against mixing unrelated changes: it makes reading the
>>>> patch to find a particular change harder. (It also means that
>>>> if one change ever needs to be reverted, it is significantly
>>>> harder to do so without also reverting any others which were in
>>>> the same patch.)
>> Like if you would ever patch something buggy.
> 
> no the wanderer doesnt normally but people who do have difficulty
> makeing sense of such a change too (i for one had to play with diff
> and sort to find the WMV3 change)
> 
> please look at the diff yourself and then ask yourself if you could
> figure out what was changed with the diff and the commit log message
> 
> 
>> Let's talk about meritocracy a bit, like someone suggested ?
> 
> we can if you like, preferably on ffmpeg-dev though, its a little off
> topic here
> 
> 
>>> ive fixed the mess, ive also found that WMV3 was removed in the
>>> change which the commit message had not mentioned and baptiste
>>> apparently forgot
>>> 
>>> baptiste please be more carefull in the future
>> Well, for sure, I won't clean any mess in the future. Yes im quite 
>> upset, and tired.
> 
> it was not my intent to piss you off, you are a valuable developer
> and your cleanups are welcome, just this one was done in an
> unaccpetable way ive fixed it not you so why are you angry?

Basically because I was looking at that table and thought that it would
need some big cleanup, chose to clean it up, and to reuse it for muxing,
then spent some time checking if I did not break anything and compared
both tables, and then added missing tags in demuxing table, then chose
to commit. Now if I just choose to think "Well no Im tired and lazy", it
won't ever be done anyway, and I clearly think this attitude is bad, so
I chose a compromise and commit it all in once mentionning what I had done.

Im all for strict rules and I hope you clearly saw it, now Im sometimes
quite pissed when strict rules lead to avoid doing things because
laziness. IMHO difference between developpers and patch senders should
be made sometimes.

>>> btw why was WMV3 removed?
>> cleanup, wmv3 is not needed since vc1 fourcc will pick up
>> CODEC_ID_VC1 for demuxing first, and never wmv3.
> 
> but for muxing WMV3 will fail to find the tag while if it where in
> the table it would succeed, at least that seems to be the case, the
> table is used on the muxer side too of course it might be wrong to
> use that tag for wmv3 i dont know but its not a cosmetical change if
> a entry is removed from a table

Well, point is that muxing is not concerned by this commit, it might be
concerned one commit after.

[...]

-- 
Baptiste COUDURIER                              GnuPG Key Id: 0x5C1ABAAA
SMARTJOG S.A.                                    http://www.smartjog.com
Key fingerprint                 8D77134D20CC9220201FC5DB0AC9325C5C1ABAAA
Phone: +33 1 49966312