[FFmpeg-devel] Donations and what happens with them

[Reimar Döffinger]

On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 07:40:18PM +0100, Reimar D?ffinger wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 07:35:47PM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 07:28:14PM +0100, Reimar D?ffinger wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 07:18:48PM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 07:08:16PM +0100, Reimar D?ffinger wrote:
> > > > > > Anyway, we don't want to kick you or anyone else away. We just want to
> > > > > > do away with some old habits of development and replace them with - we
> > > > > > think - better ones.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'd still like to know what everyone thinks are those better ones are.
> > > > > Because what I have seen happening is:
> > > > > 
> > > > > - You said you'd require ok by two developers, essentially doubling review
> > > > >   effort for all external patches.
> > > > 
> > > > Where did you get this idea?
> > > 
> > > From this:
> > > 
> > > - All changes shall be reviewed and approved by at least one other
> > >   developer
> > > 
> > > The alternative is that a rule for external contributions was never
> > > mentioned at all...
> > 
> > OK, so this unclear, let me rephrase it:
> > 
> > - All changes (by long-time as well as new developers) are to be sent
> >   as patches to ffmpeg-devel.  Once they have been reviewed by at least
> >   one other developer knowledgeable in the area touched by the patch
> >   they are pulled into the central repository.
> > 
> > Does that clarify the original intention?
> 
> Yes, at the cost of confusing the meaning of the term "developer" though.
> And not considering that I consider quite some parts of FFmpeg to have
> 0 developers that are really knowledgeable.
> So not that much of a win overall.

Before someone takes this wrongly: I don't want a "water-tight"
formulation, that never works.
But the "get a maintainer to ok or wait for a few days" seemed
more robust against review overload.
Also I am somewhat amused by the fact that the quickest way
to get something in would be to ask some proxy to submit the
patch for you and then ok it yourself, silly or not that just
feels wrong.