[FFmpeg-devel] DVCPRO HD: request for review

Baptiste Coudurier baptiste.coudurier
Fri Aug 29 20:42:05 CEST 2008

Michael, Roman,

Roman V. Shaposhnik wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-08-29 at 19:50 +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 09:54:25AM -0700, Roman V. Shaposhnik wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2008-08-29 at 05:52 +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>>>> I'll commit everything today and this piece
>>>> Iam not sure if this and your commit of 170k of unapproved code is a joke.
>>>> If it is, i do not like you humor.
>>> No it isn't. It is an honest attempt to continue as a DV maintainer.
>>>> Please revert it and commit the parts that have been approved cleanly
>>>> in several seperate commits.
>>> No. And if treating maintainers in this manner is your kind of humor
>>> I don't think I appreciate it either. Moreover, this is not the first
>>> time when you ridicule me after I honestly tried to work all the issues
>>> with you and had an impression that they were all resolved.
>> They clearly where not resolved, 
> Please point to a single issue (except the table) which wasn't resolved.
>>> I do have
>>> commitments as far as DVCPRO HD is concerned 
>> I could have guessed that much from the daily private mails from you about
>> reviewing your patch soon and quickly.
> Don't pretend you always know better. The commitments I have have more
> to do with me feeling a responsibility as a DV maintainer, than with
> anything you've imagined. If you think that NON having DVPRO HD in
> FFmpeg is better for the project, or that you can implement it yourself
> or whatever -- I'd be happy to stop being part of this project *right
> now* since I'm quite fed up with you personally and with how you've
> managed to ruin the social microcosm around here.

Having DVCPRO HD in FFmpeg in definitely better, and yes Im personally
interested in it, and I wrote the mov muxing code.

Now about the social microcosm running, I think honnestly this was true
some time ago (especially when I was personally involved in fights), but
I now really think that climate and microcosm changed lately, atmosphere
is really better now IMHO.

We all work for the sake of bringing FFmpeg up here, and we all have the
same goal, we also have differents commitments and interests, discussing
as a "team" is needed, not necessarly in a "pyramid" way (Michael /
single dev people), however Michael tends to do everything around here,
so this is less obvious IMHO.

Encouraging people working is really nice, and I try to do it as much as
I can, and several people are doing it too.


I really liked Peter work on pcm audio, and I liked your work, Roman, on
DVCPROHD, and I really liked Michael's H.264 work, also Stefano's work
on documentation, Robert put many efforts in AAC decoder, and it was
worth, and I'd also thank him for this awesome work, same for Kostya's
work which will bring FFmpeg to another level without extra dependencies.


Working around here is _not_ easy and we need to encourage ourselves.

>>> so I'm willing to tolerate
>>> your behavior while I'm trying to integrate decoder and encoder. 
>>> But once that happens, I believe I have no place in the project like
>>> this.
>> That is sad, but i will not tolerate that people start commiting unclean
>> code because their payment from some contact might depend on it.
> I have 0 contract money at stake here. And trying to imply that I do
> is just pathetic. I knew you were a pompous jerk, but I would never
> imagined that you would go as low.

Well, Dans had, and some people already offered bounty for this work, so
while the commitment and the cleanup of Dans is clearly _obvious_, and I
think Michael should have realized it, this is not 100% true that there
is no contract / money behind DVCPROHD as a whole.

> Besides, speaking of unlcean code -- lets have an experiment on the
> mailing list. The code is now in SVN (not for long, though) so is
> there a single developer on this list who has a major issue 
> with what has been committed (again, with a sole exception of tables
> which I WILL resolve given a chance)? You keep implying a peer review,
> so lets have a peer review.
>> Where exactly did you do something on roundup? I cannot find a single mail
>> from you on the corresponding mailing list.
> I started working on two issues if you must know. Yes I'm slow and 
> stupid, but if you are so smart and fats why do we still have 200+
> bugs logged there?

Sorry but this is irrelevant, I can myself fix some bugs, and I do when
I can, others can do too, and as a policy, I'd really like maintainers
to fix bugs in their code, the whole team should try to fix all bugs in

> [...]
>>>> Several people including me and vitor try hard to cleanup codecs that had
>>>> been added without passing through proper review, we really do not need
>>>> more such code.
>>> What code?
>> the 170k you commited, i have no interrest in cleaning it up.
> I will clean them up myself given a chance. I don't understand why you
> don't give it to me and keep at it with your threats.

Well, Roman has a point here I think, and I sometimes feels this way
too, for example I like the commit then review scheme, however this
doesn't work for big patches like in this case.

Now I honestly really like you both, and I hope we all can settle these
problems for the sake of FFmpeg project.

Baptiste COUDURIER                              GnuPG Key Id: 0x5C1ABAAA
Smartjog USA Inc.                                http://www.smartjog.com
Key fingerprint                 8D77134D20CC9220201FC5DB0AC9325C5C1ABAAA

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list