[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Cosmetics: display generic advanced options just after generic non-advanced options
Tue Jun 17 14:18:25 CEST 2008
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 10:09:31AM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 09:30:36AM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> > On date Monday 2008-06-16 17:21:20 +0200, Diego Biurrun encoded:
> > > On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 03:11:06PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> > > > Hi, as in subject, looks more consistent with order followed by the
> > > > following option printing (that is: non advanced, video options,
> > > > advanced video options, non advanced audio options, advanced audio
> > > > options, ...).
> > >
> > > Looks OK to me.
> > Is it OK to apply or do I have to wait for Michael's approval?
> In theory you have to wait for Michael's approval. Another developer
> agreeing with the patch does of course give you some assurance that you
> are going down the right way.
> Michael said he does not care about these patches and wanted somebody
> else to review them.
did i? I remember saying something like that about the huge long names
patch but the rest, hmm
Anyway with the patch here the question really is if we want
Its a question about what most of our users would prefer ...
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
Democracy is the form of government in which you can choose your dictator
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the ffmpeg-devel