[FFmpeg-devel] Donations and what happens with them

[Arpi]

Hi,

> On 27 January 2011 22:31, compn <tempn at twmi.rr.com> wrote:
> > so you guys want michael to not be leader.
> > and michael wants mans and diego to not be root if he is not leader.
> >
> > is that it basically? thats the entire list of demands on both sides ?
> > doesnt seem so bad.
> 
> That's what I thought after reading these latest emails too. (Though
> Michael did not mention Diego when he said "and i refuse to continue
> to work under mans as root if iam not leader." )

Diego's burial will be fund by the foundation, dont you remember? :)
I'm personally against Diego doing ANYTHING regarding to mplayer or ffmpeg.

I was not against Koth, but by reading his mail today i've changed my mind :(
(I was in doubt he actually supported this mess)

> Here are some ideas to maybe move forward:
> 
> People
> ------
> Michael steps down as FFmpeg _leader_.
> M?ns steps down as _root_.
> 
> Trees
> -----
> (I hate to bring it up, but ... ) The best compromise concerning
> mpcodecs I've seen was put it on a branch and have some sort of
> porting marathon. I think lu_zero suggested it.

I have to agree, as author of libmpcodecs, it is a messy code and
somehow broken API, it should not go into ffmpeg as-is, but the
plugins (the good ones, not the useless/joke ones) should be
ported properly into ffmpeg-s filter architecture.
I would be volunteering to do/help this process.
Btw i've developed some new libmpcodecs plugins last year, which
i didnt sent to the MLs.
(i was impatient to bikeshed with diego on code indenting...
btw this whole indentation rules/enforcement should gone, it's
nonsense, i dont know any coder who uses consistent indentation
over all his code... only beginner programmers do, sometimes.
if anyone wants to read the code in nice indentation, he can
anytime run a code formatter with his favourite settings)

> Sync the two git trees on git.ffmpeg.org and git.videolan.org.

there should not be 2 git repos, Mans' fork should gone, or at
least be moved/renamed to a new server where he may be root :)

> Procedure
> ---------
> Some people seem to be upset that they can't commit (in the svn sense
> of the word) to the git.ffmpeg repo even though they are (file)

Wonder?

> maintainers. So that needs to be resolved. In the Announcement thread
> it was stated more committers (svn definition) could be added later.
> Would a solution be: grant file maintainers write access to the repos
> again, but maintain the rule (from the Announcement) that all changes
> must be reviewed by another developer who is deemed knowledgeable on
> the topic. (Review on the ffmpeg-devel mailinglist, so that it's in
> the mailinglist archive.)

I think the old commit model should be restired, it worked for over 10 years.
Everyone may get commit rights after a few valuable and perfect patches.
At least trust hobbist people, if you dont pay them!
It is not their goal to fuck up the code, they all work to improve it.

> Comments? Critiques? Any other issues that _need_ to be resolved
> before FFmpeg can continue as one big ha^H^H^H^H^H^H ?

I was there from the first days of ffmpeg, when Fabrice was not called
Fabrice, and when he wrote the first opensource divx 3.11 decoder...
It's very sad to see where did Diego & friends bring this project :(((((((

A'rpi