[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] restore git.videolan to download page

[Reimar Döffinger]

On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 09:19:27AM -0800, Jason Garrett-Glaser wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Reinhard Tartler <siretart at tauware.de> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 17:32:19 (CET), compn wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 16:07:06 +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> >>>On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 02:58:10PM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> >>>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 08:29:34AM -0500, compn wrote:
> >>>> > if this looks alright to everyone i'll commit...
> >>>> >
> >>>> > --- download ? ? ?(revision 535)
> >>>> > +++ download ? ? ?(working copy)
> >>>> > @@ -33,6 +33,22 @@
> >>>> >
> >>>> > +<h2>FFmpeg Git (original tree) </h2>
> >>>> > +<p>
> >>>> > +This git repository contains MPlayer filters and is synched up to the newer tree.
> >>>>
> >>>> Is it? ?Will it remain synchronized?
> >>>
> >>>yes unless we find a compromise iam planing to indefinitly support at least
> >>>pulling all changes from the hijaker fork (minus ones which are really bad but
> >>>i trust you all that really bad things will be very rare or absent)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Why are you mentioning the filters?
> >>>> Because they are a distinctive feature? ?This looks like a fragile way to
> >>>> characterize the differences between trees.
> >>>
> >>>I agree
> >>>a few days ago i thought about something like
> >>>"mean, ugly, dirty, featurepacked and all features and bugfixes of ffmpeg.org
> >>> reviewed twice, once by the new maintainers and once before merging."
> >>>(thats actually what i did so far and wasnt that hard, and the description
> >>> can easily be changed if i run out of time to review the changes then we
> >>> can say blindly synced)
> >>>
> >>>But i feared you would refuse the patch and didnt want to start unneeded
> >>>mud spraying so i thought id think a bit more about it. But it really looks
> >>>best to me ATM
> >>
> >> are you ok with this then?
> >>
> >> i just want to put the repo on the download page without much
> >> trouble. so please no grandstanding.
> >>
> >> -compn
> >> Index: download
> >> ===================================================================
> >> --- download ?(revision 535)
> >> +++ download ?(working copy)
> >> @@ -33,6 +33,23 @@
> >> ?<a href="http://git.ffmpeg.org/?p=ffmpeg.git">browse it online</a>.
> >> ?</p>
> >>
> >> +<h2>FFmpeg Git (original tree) </h2>
> >> +<p>
> >> +mean, ugly, dirty, featurepacked and all features and bugfixes of git.ffmpeg.org
> >> +reviewed twice, once by the new maintainers and once before merging.
> >> +</p>
> >
> > I'd prefer if we could avoid judgemental wording here.
> 
> I agree, it isn't reasonable to force our flamewars on users...

I don't want to dispute it not being a great description, but
I read that more as "funny" than "flamey". Just making
sure you didn't read anything into it that isn't there :-)