[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Remove the ffserver program and the ffm muxer/demuxer

[James Almer]

On 11/28/2016 12:59 PM, Nicolas George wrote:
> L'octidi 8 frimaire, an CCXXV, James Almer a écrit :
>> No Nicolas. It's a reminder that this patch, as discussed and announced, will
>> be pushed.
> 
> And the Corleone give you reminders that they will break your legs.
> 
>> I don't care about ffserver.
> 
> Then do not discuss ffserver.

I discuss project management. This is a late attempt at overriding a decision
from parties that didn't participate in the real decision making discussions.

This crap wouldn't fly anywhere else, but somehow, and according to you, it's
rational on ffmpeg.

> 
>> 			       I do care about the consequences of a bunch of
>> people that showed up very late to the party getting away with trying to
>> override an old project decision right when it was going to be made effective.
> 
> What are those consequences, pray?

That nobody will take the project seriously anymore. That nobody will believe
in any announcement anymore. That anyone will be 100% sure that with a little
lobbying and trolling they will be able to get away with absolutely anything,
including overriding old decisions.

> 
>> This is a lie
> 
> No.

How it isn't?

> 
>> Look it up, stop trying to rewrite history and stop being part of the
>> aforementioned malicious behavior.
> 
> I see nothing malicious in trying to keep a useful program up to date.
> You have strange priorities.

Malicious was the attempt at turning efforts of making the program capable
of living on its own into an argument against the reason why it must go.

You're aware that we could have told Reynaldo that no, we don't want to give
him time to make it work standalone, and this patch would have been pushed
a week or two ago, long before you even realized this all was even happening?

> 
>> Too bad the decision was made and announced.
> 
> Decisions can be revised. If this one exists, then it should.
> 
>> 						Had this happened months or
>> years ago, when help was requested and promptly ignored, it wouldn't have
>> ended up like this.
> 
> What difference does it make?

That the decision was made, and there's no going back. And much less after
the malicious attempts i already described and pointed you to, that you
seemingly intend to ignore.