[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/4] doc/developer.texi: extend the argument for submitting patches

[Soft Works]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces at ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of
> Anton Khirnov
> Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 10:13 AM
> To: ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> Subject: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/4] doc/developer.texi: extend the
> argument for submitting patches
> 
> Stop talking about commercial programs, since this applies to any
> downstream user.
> ---
>  doc/developer.texi | 20 +++++++++++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/doc/developer.texi b/doc/developer.texi
> index 5cf3b19ee0..2f0d2b7daa 100644
> --- a/doc/developer.texi
> +++ b/doc/developer.texi
> @@ -24,11 +24,21 @@ generated from the headers
>  the examples under @file{doc/examples}
>  @end itemize
> 
> -You can use the FFmpeg libraries in your commercial program, but you
> -are encouraged to @emph{publish any patch you make}. In this case
> the
> -best way to proceed is to send your patches to the ffmpeg-devel
> -mailing list following the guidelines illustrated in the remainder
> of
> -this document.
> +If you modify FFmpeg code for your own use case, you are highly
> encouraged to
> + at emph{submit your changes back to us}, using this document as a
> guide. There are
> +both pragmatic and ideological reasons to do so:
> + at itemize @bullet
> + at item
> +Maintaining external changes to keep up with upstream development is
> +time-consuming and error-prone. With your code in the main tree, it
> will be
> +maintained by FFmpeg developers.

You should mention that sometimes it's not really worth to take the effort,
because waiting for reviews and permanent rebasing and re-submitting,
explaining, defending, getting insulted or ignored and whatsoever,
might end up taking much more time than just to keep and maintain your 
changes privately. Eventually you might regret that you have even
started going that way.

Regards,
softworkz