[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025

[Vittorio Giovara]

On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 8:55 AM Paul B Mahol <onemda at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 8:53 AM Vittorio Giovara <
> vittorio.giovara at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 3:01 AM Cosmin Stejerean via ffmpeg-devel <
> > ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org> wrote:
> >
> > > > Reposting my question/comment here since Thilo hasn't had a chance to
> > > > respond, but shouldn't these kinds of requests go through the GA? If
> > > > anybody can do whatever they want with the ffmpeg name, then what's
> the
> > > > point of voting and following the established process?
> > >
> > > Probably? I'm not actually sure what the process is for getting an
> FFmpeg
> > > booth at a conference. Is there a documented process somewhere for how
> > this
> > > should be done? If not this might be a good opportunity to create one.
> > >
> >
> > Agreed, do you have a draft you could share as a base of discussion? Once
> > defined, we could have the GA vote on it
> >
> >
> > > It might also make for a good topic of discussion at VDD. For how much
> > > drama there was about NAB on the list I was surprised there was zero
> > > discussion about it at FOSDEM.
> > >
> >
> > There were probably more important topics to discuss and the lingering
> hope
> > that the problematic points would have been handled better than by
> calling
> > people trolls
> >
> >
> > > Regarding the "or you" part, I wasn't involved in securing sponsorship
> > for
> > > NAB or IBC. I did volunteer to help with NAB because I happen to live
> in
> > > Vegas and I enjoy spending time with other ffmpeg developers. I'm happy
> > to
> > > help at NAB next year as well should it happen again.
> > >
> >
> > Noted, it should have said "or anybody willing to host/help a booth"
> >
> > I have no plans to attend IBC and no involvement with the FFmpeg booth at
> > > IBC. I am merely trying to correct the perception that NAB was
> > > cost-problematic, since no money was paid by the project for NAB.
> > >
> >
> > I don't think anybody is suggesting that booths are cost-problematic, but
> > rather they are lacking in process (one shouldn't allowed use ffmpeg name
> > "just because") and in scope (aka "the why" and what kind of results are
> > expected by investing time in said booth)
> >
>
> Said by prominent LibAV developer.
>

reported to CC :)
-- 
Vittorio