[MPlayer-cvslog] r19258 - trunk/DOCS/tech/oggless-xiph-codecs.txt

[Michael Niedermayer]

Hi

On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 01:21:54AM +0200, Alex Beregszaszi wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > > For some reason MPlayer related people are getting more and
> > > picky and pedantic these days (or months)[1]. Please step a little
> > > bit back and think twice before you write a rant or accuse someone
> > > of something. Flameing everyone and everything doesn't help us
> > > at all, but will just get everyone pissed. So, please.
> > 
> > sorry, ive had a little headache today, somehow that together with the
> > already mentioned things (mov/mp4 header, 4 lost lines, ...) caused 
> > me to flame a little more then normally :)
> 
> But if you flamed because those four "lost lines" and mov/mp4 header,
> that means you didnt tried to look at the file I commited as it has
> different sections for qt and mp4 and has those lines added, which i
> forgot in the very first incarnation. You could eventually have a look
> at it now as I suggested earlier.
> 
> I dont think it has sense maintaining two different files containing 95%
> the same information. 

i agree


> Just say that you dont want that RFC thing and
> remove it from the repository.

i do like the idea of a RFC but
1. i dont like xml
2. i dont like it if functional changes are mixed with cosmetic
3. i dont like it if changes are not disscussed, if you are sure
   something is correct then no problem but the mov/mp4 changes
   where all wrong and should have been disscussed before commiting

so the following must be clarified
A. why xml?
B. do you agree on disscussing every non trivial change before commiting it?
C. do you agree to keep functional changes and cosmetics seperate?

[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

In the past you could go to a library and read, borrow or copy any book
Today you'd get arrested for mere telling someone where the library is