[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] 5 year plan & Inovation

[Ronald S. Bultje]

Hi,

On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 5:58 PM Vittorio Giovara <vittorio.giovara at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 12:48 PM Ronald S. Bultje <rsbultje at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 2:06 PM Vittorio Giovara <
> > vittorio.giovara at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 11:00 AM Diederick C. Niehorster <
> > > dcnieho at gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > If i recall correctly, there was a conversation not too long ago
> about
> > > what
> > > > to do with all the SPI money. This seems to be a perfect use for it.
> > > > 1. Set up and manage a gitlab instance
> > > > 2. Move tickets from trac to there (possibly)
> > > > 3. Move fate running to there
> > > >
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > Another good idea would be to show negative influences the door, and
> not
> > > being afraid to ban them when needed.
> > > Currently the CC is supposed to decide that but idk how many and which
> > > people have access to the mailing list control panel.
> > >
> >
> > The CC does not have authority to permanently ban people. See (
> > https://ffmpeg.org/community.html#Community-Committee-1): "The CC can
> > remove privileges of offending members, including [..] temporary ban from
> > the community. [..] Indefinite bans from the community must be confirmed
> by
> > the General Assembly, in a majority vote."
> >
> > Enough of us have access to the ML admin interface to assume this will
> not
> > be an issue.
> >
>
> Thanks for the clarification, it's good to know. So correct me if I'm
> wrong, the theoretical banning process is that a repeated offender is
> reported enough times, the CC notices that the temporary bans have had no
> effects and decides to invoke the GA to confirm a ban?
>

Yes. But anyone else, even you, could start a GA permaban vote also. (I'm
not suggesting you do this, I'm just saying it so it's clear that it
doesn't have to be initiated by a CC member.)

Ronald