[FFmpeg-devel] core infrastructure badge for FFmpeg
gajjanag at mit.edu
Wed Jul 6 16:11:28 EEST 2016
06.07.2016, 08:51, "Jean-Baptiste Kempf" <jb at videolan.org>:
> On 06 Jul, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote :
>> > But, you could at least be a bit more truthful when filling it:
>> > - the buildsystem is not common tools, since you have your own
>> > configure (it's a SUGGESTED thing anyway)
>> As far as I know, shell script is a common tool available on POSIX platforms.
> This is not what they mean:
> They mention "For example, Maven, Ant, cmake, the autotools, make, or
> rake". Else, they would mention shell script, since it's the base of
> many of those tools.
> A custom script is not a common build system tool.
How configure.ac that gets fed into autotools etc is acceptable and configure is not is beyond me.
As for their meaning, I don't know.
>> > - the new functionnality testing is only done in libavcodec,
>> I did not assert to the contrary, but it is certainly an "informal" policy per the dev docs.
>> I did acknowledge the lack of tests in certain places such as libavfilter.
> Not only libavfilter.
So you want me to change from "libavfilter" to "everything except libavcodec"?
Note that it is anyway marked as "not met".
>> > - half of the links given are over github, which is not FLOSS and is
>> > just a mirror... And other on ffmpeg.org
>> So what? There is no requirement that the links must be posted on FLOSS sites,
>> whatever that means which you conveniently leave unspecified.
>> The purpose of the mirror here is just as a reference point, and can always be changed.
>> There is some lack of consistency in link usage, I am going to change it.
> I just mean that this is not coherent. Especially on something that is
> not controlled by you.
Changed, all gratuitous github links have been amended. Thanks.
>> > - you do not use SEMVER (it's a SUGGESTED improvement too)
>> I thought we did, since that is what I assumed the chicanery regarding major, minor, etc was all about.
>> Will amend.
> SEMVER is stupid anyway.
>> > - everything related to external users should be N/A and not "met",
>> > (I doubt they mean trac here)
>> Please be more explicit here. What is wrong with trac as a link for a bug tracker?
> Good cryptographic practices, questions 8 and 9 should be "N/A", not
> "met": you don't store users credential, as you say in the comment.
So you are saying that regarding RNG, Q9 is referring to internal use by the project infrastructure?
Otherwise I don't see how it is "N/A"; it is either met or not.
>> > - where is written the policy that coverity must be run on each release?
>> No policy, but Michael did say that "we do run coverity around the release time generally".
>> From my experience over the last 6 months, Coverity was run at least once before each release.
>> If there was an instance where it was not, sure, I will remove it.
> "said" and "policy" are different things, notably for MUST items.
Ok, changed to "not met" for now.
> Jean-Baptiste Kempf
> http://www.jbkempf.com/ - +33 672 704 734
> Sent from my Electronic Device
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
More information about the ffmpeg-devel