[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] Donations & hw for FFmpeg developers

Thilo Borgmann thilo.borgmann at mail.de
Fri Sep 13 11:58:31 CEST 2013

Am 13.09.13 11:48, schrieb Michael Niedermayer:
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:20:46AM +0200, Thilo Borgmann wrote:
>> Am 13.09.13 03:38, schrieb Michael Niedermayer:
>>> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 11:55:29AM +0200, Thilo Borgmann wrote:
>>>> Am 11.09.13 11:50, schrieb Thilo Borgmann:
>>>>>> Are there any FFmpeg developers who need faster hardware for their
>>>>>> work on FFmpeg ?
>>>>>> If there are, i think we should make a list of who needs what.
>>>>>> Then people and companies could donate either hw or money to that
>>>>>> developer directly or over SPI for that hw.
>>>>>> And there are many companies who would benefit from developers being
>>>>>> able to work more efficiently and faster ...
>>>>>> Also faster hw would mean fate tests run faster and developers would
>>>>>> less often skip them which would translate into fewer breakages in
>>>>>> git.
>>>>>> bisecting regressions would proportionally speed up with faster hw
>>>>>> and so on ...
>>>>> I would propose to add a new ticket type like "sponsoring request" or similar to
>>>>> Trac. Then create a new report for these tickets and have a direct link to that
>>>>> report on the webpage.
>>>>> Tickets can give a better description of what to expect from the view of a
>>>>> potential sponsor than a plain table entry. Also, amongst further advantages,
>>>>> they are easier to maintain than a list directly on the webpage, for example.
>>>>> Btw there has also been a question during the VDD of how to help us besides
>>>>> directly giving money - e.g. by using a companies hardware infrastructure,
>>>>> making specs accessible etc. Next to that such needs could also be reflected by
>>>>> a ticket, we might continue that discussion started during VDD here.
>>>> And while thinking about it, the other way around by adding a "bounty"-like
>>>> ticket type could be of use for companies to announce sponsored feature requests
>>>> instead of writing to the few developers at the consulting page...
>>> maybe "bounty" as keyword would work better than as ticket type
>>> consider someone wants to send 5 pizzas to whoever fixes bug #123
>>> the ticket would be of type defect (or could be a feature request
>>> too)
>>> but if people prefer a ticket type i can add one, its not hard ...
>> I don't really care although duplicated ticket types (e.g. "typename (bounty)")
>> would be easier to find in all the existing reports listing the ticket types but
>> not the keywords.
> with that logic we then also need
> typeneme (linux)
> typename (win32)
> typename (crash)
> typename (regression)
> and combinations
> or why just bounty ?

I'm fine with keywords.


More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list