[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avcodec/jpeg2000dec: Fix mixed declaration and code

[Paul B Mahol]

On 4/11/20, Anton Khirnov <anton at khirnov.net> wrote:
> Quoting Paul B Mahol (2020-04-11 11:29:40)
>> On 4/11/20, Anton Khirnov <anton at khirnov.net> wrote:
>> > 100%? Meaning you think no patches should go to the mailing list?
>> >
>> > Or only some specific patches are exempt? Based on what criterion? And
>> > who applies it?
>> > And most importantly, why?
>>
>> Only trivial patches, like cosmetics of few lines, and this one above
>
> In my experience the line between "trivial cosmetics" and "nontrivial
> changes" is very fuzzy and observer-dependent. Better to be safe and
> just send everything. It's not like there is a massive flood of trivial
> patches all the time.
>
>> and functional patches that clean ups code.
>
> Not sure what you mean here. "clean up" can mean refactoring patches,
> which can be highly fragile and should most certainly be reviewed when
> possible.
>
>>
>> Why? Because it adds too much burden for real review work on this mailing
>> list.
>
> It's certainly worth considering how to structure patch submission
> better, so that people do not need to wade through piles of emails that
> don't concern them. E.g. splitting the mailing lists into per-library,
> or implementing some sort of a tagging system or moving to some kind of
> a merge-request system come to mind. But I do not think directly pushing
> patches without any possibility of review is a good solution to this.
>

Disagree, there are people that just comment for just showing how they
lack insight in actual code.

Or they want to force someone into specific nits.