[FFmpeg-devel] The "bad" Patch

[softworkz .]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces at ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of
> softworkz .
> Sent: Mittwoch, 28. Mai 2025 20:01
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-
> devel at ffmpeg.org>
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] The "bad" Patch
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces at ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of
> Rémi
> > Denis-Courmont
> > Sent: Mittwoch, 28. Mai 2025 19:34
> > To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-
> > devel at ffmpeg.org>
> > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] The "bad" Patch
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Whatever glibc does or doesn't do is kinda irrelevant. FFmpeg is
> > supposed to be portable and that makes `system()` a non-starter
> given
> > how bad it *can* be.
> 
> On Windows it runs ShellExecute, on Mac it does nothing.
> We're talking about Linux only - which was the focus of the comments.
> 
> 
> 
> > With that said, and with my CC hat on, if you would consider a
> > portably safer alternative, I can only say that considering what
> > strong objections there were, and who made them, the only way
> forward
> > (if any) is to solicit the TC.
> 
> I don't want this patch to be merged.
> 
> And this cannot be wiped away by referring to any general sayings. The
> patch is very specific and when somebody makes drastic comments like
> the
> ones that were made, then I expect that these were made based on
> thorough
> evaluation and consideration.
> 
> Now, I'm asking those persons to lay out their considerations at a
> technical level, specific to the code in that patch - or apologize for
> their invalid assessments.

Probably nobody will have the moral courage to apologize, anyway.

Not being able to explain their assessments will suffice.

sw