[FFmpeg-user] where to post suggestion for the documentation?

[Paul B Mahol]

On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 11:05 PM Jim DeLaHunt <list+ffmpeg-user at jdlh.com>
wrote:

> On 2020-11-02 13:42, Steve Newcomb wrote:
>
> > Where should I post a suggestion for a minor clarifying improvement to
> > the documentation that certainly would have saved me some time
> > <https://trac.ffmpeg.org/ticket/8944#comment:2>?
>
> Thank you for pointing out this omission in the FFmpeg documentation
> <https://ffmpeg.org/ffmpeg-protocols.html#pipe>. You are making a good
> suggestion about what to add in order to correct that omission:
>
>  > Any number of unnamed output pipes is supported, provided all output
> pipes are inherited from a parent process that creates them, allows them
> to be inherited by child processes, and then spawns ffmpeg and all the
> processes that will read those same pipes.
>
> I think <https://trac.ffmpeg.org/ticket/8944> is a poor place to put
> that message, however, because the ticket's description is already
> centred around the observations about ffmpeg functionality; observations
> which ar ebased on a misunderstanding. That means this ticket will
> likely get closed and ignored.
>
> It would be better to have a separate ticket which is centred on the
> documentation omission.
>
> Just to set your expectations, however, this project does not seem to
> value improving its documentation. Don't be surprised if that ticket
> languishes. You could also learn how to edit the documentation, and
> submit a patch with the documentation fix to ffmpeg-devel. That patch
> might well also languish, because it may not get the sign-off required
> for it to be applied. I speak from experience.
>
> As evidence of this attitude, see
> <https://trac.ffmpeg.org/ticket/8944#comment:3> on your ticket:
>
>  > FFmpeg's documentation is not a a beginner's course to Unix. Learn to
> use your operating system.
>
> Zero concession that the documentation omits useful information. Zero
> acknowledgement that the documentation should have a goal to help users
> succeed when using FFmpeg. 100% blame on user's ignorance for the obstacle.
>
> As a second-best approach, I've included your suggested paragraph here,
> where it will get into the list archives. Maybe someone searching for
> help will find your insight that way.
>
> Sorry to be a bearer of bad news. Thank you again for your efforts to
> share what you have learned. Many readers of this list appreciate it.
>
>
I really wish there are no people like you on this list at all.
Please unsubscribe immediately from this list and never ever come back.

We do not need people that tell bad and untrue things about this project.

Contributing patches is always welcomed but your repeated attacks are not.



>       —Jim DeLaHunt, software engineer, Vancouver, Canada
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-user mailing list
> ffmpeg-user at ffmpeg.org
> https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user
>
> To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
> ffmpeg-user-request at ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".