[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] doc/developer: require transparency about sponshorships.

Nicolas George george at nsup.org
Mon Jan 14 18:20:21 EET 2019

Tobias Rapp (12019-01-14):
> Writing good code requires time. I don't see how being sponsored for
> development should have a negative correlation (in general) to the time
> invested on a specific topic/patch.

Let us say somebody worked one day on a sponsored patch. They now have
two choices:

- spend another day refactoring the code, designing functions API so
  that they can be shared with existing code;

- submit as is and start working on a new patch for a new sponsorship.

Which one will be more attractive?

Of course, the same could apply to « start working on a new feature »,
but the value of refactoring and clean code for new features is more

Also, if the code becomes less readable, more complex, then knowing it
well becomes more valuable, in a marketable sense.


  Nicolas George
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20190114/715ab5dc/attachment.sig>

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list