[FFmpeg-cvslog] r23904 - in trunk: cmdutils.h libavcodec/aac_parser.h libavcodec/ac3.c libavcodec/ac3.h libavcodec/ac3_parser.h libavcodec/ac3tab.c libavcodec/allcodecs.c libavcodec/alsdec.c libavcodec/avcodec.h l...

[Stefano Sabatini]

On date Wednesday 2010-06-30 22:00:01 +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 09:08:04PM +0200, Vitor Sessak wrote:
> > On 06/30/2010 08:55 PM, Alex Converse wrote:
> >> 2010/6/30 M?ns Rullg?rd<mans at mansr.com>:
> >>> Michael Niedermayer<michaelni at gmx.at>  writes:
> >>>
> >>>> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 06:46:05PM +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> >>>>> Michael Niedermayer<michaelni at gmx.at>  writes:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 05:38:06PM +0200, mru wrote:
> >>>>>>> Author: mru
> >>>>>>> Date: Wed Jun 30 17:38:06 2010
> >>>>>>> New Revision: 23904
> >>>>>> [...]
> >>>>>>>   /**
> >>>>>>> - * Sets the libav* libraries log level.
> >>>>>>> + * Set the libav* libraries log level.
> >>>>>>>    */
> >>>>>>>   int opt_loglevel(const char *opt, const char *arg);
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The 3rd vs. 1st person style has been discussed many times and never
> >>>>>> has a majority for this change existed let alone a consensus. Besides
> >>>>>> you do not maintain these files that you change and 3rd person is
> >>>>>> the recommanded style of javadoc&  doxygen. And it also sounds much
> >>>>>> better (to me at least).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The style was inconsistent.  I made it consistent, something nobody
> >>>>> else appeared willing to do.  I should have known I'd only be flamed
> >>>>> for my hard work.
> >>>>
> >>>> You consistently changed the form the team agreed upon to the your personal
> >>>> preferance.
> >>>
> >>> I changed it to the style agreed by all developers with a good
> >>> knowledge of English grammar to be the preferred.  Neither you nor
> >>> Stefano are in that category.

I tried to explain countless times that I personally don't give a shit
about what form to prefer, curiously I've always been ignored, people
pretending to say that I'm imposing my own style (which I never did,
my point was about consistency).

>  Would you let Diego dictate rules for
> >>> your asm code?  Didn't think so.  Now please allow the experts in each
> >>> area to do their job.  Your expertise is in writing fast C code, not
> >>> in English grammar.
> >>>
> >>
> >> This is probably the wrong place to weigh in, but as a native English
> >> speaker I agree with M?ns here.
> >
> > As a non-native speaker (we are the majority here, no?), I am strongly  
> > against adding more english-related red-tape for getting code committed.  
> > Really, getting comments that use good wording and have no grammatical  
> > mistakes take time already, having to avoid _correct_ grammar forms is  
> > just silly. I'm all for consistency, but it has a price and here I think  
> > it is not worth it.
> 
> That's why third person should be avoided, too.  It's simpler to write
> in impersonal form.

I agree with the purpose of the commit, but the way it has been done,
in open contrast with the rules of this community, is deprecable.

Anyway I'll be pragmatic, so my proposal is to keep this commit and
clearly states the style to adopt in the guidelines, clearly stating
that in the guidelines is much better than point that out during
review again and again, which is unfriendly and wastes the precious
time of both the contributor and the reviewer.

So please let's try to not waste time on this bikeshed anymore, we
have a lot of work to do and almost half part of the world to conquer
yet ;-).

Check attached patch, regards.