[MPlayer-cvslog] r26411 - trunk/libmpdemux/demuxer.c

[Ivan Kalvachev]

On 5/31/08, Diego Biurrun <diego at biurrun.de> wrote:
> On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 08:51:17PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 05:23:32PM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
>> > On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 12:58:02AM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> > > On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 07:49:24PM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
>> > > > I know most of them personally, like them and the feeling is mutual.
>> > > > Nonetheless nowadays MPlayer is being developed by a new generation
>> > > > of people. That does not mean that the contributions of those people
>> > > > are insubstantial or that not appreciated.
>> > > 
>> > > Yes but it also does not mean that the experience the "old generation"
>> > > has
>> > > collected over the years should be ignored like it is. The people not
>> > > being
>> > > against uoti are new people who do not yet have the same
>> > > experience reimar, roberto, iive, ... have in respect to maintaining a
>> > > large project with many developers working, joining and leaving ...
>> > 
>> > Reimar never spoke in favor of removing Uoti.
>> 
>> Not litterally i think, but iam pretty sure he said something to the
>> effect of
>> him being in favor of uoti being removed if theres no other solution being
>> found ...
>
> .. i think .. pretty sure .. something to the effect of ..
>
> He did not say anything like that literally, nor implied.  I was the one
> to talk to him personally, not you.  Let Reimar speak for himself, do not
> make guesses or assumptions about his opinions.
>
>> > > Or the same about commiting with no warning to code actively
>> > > maintained
>> > > by others. Even if one ignores what the "old generation" says, just
>> > > looking
>> > > at the recent months shows how such commits get everyone near boiling.
>> > > Even you go crazy if iive just changes xvids spelling.
>> > 
>> > I did not "go crazy".  I'm old enough to be able not to freak out over
>> > such silly provocations.
>> 
>> You always freak out about any flies from ivans direction.
>
> No, I think that nowadays I can remain pretty calm when he tries to
> provoke me.  You do not have the dubious pleasure of sharing IRC
> channels with him and don't know half of what goes on between us.
>
> To say that Ivan and I do not get along well is an understatement.  He
> has personally attacked and insulted me many times.  I'm through with
> him.  That said, I have to put up with him around here and try my best
> to ignore him.
>
>> > > > Note that many many outsiders consider the environment around FFmpeg
>> > > > very hostile.
>> > > 
>> > > Note that many many pigs consider birds ugly.
>> > > no i have no evidence but neither do you.
>> > 
>> > It seems that you move in FFmpeg-related circles only then.  I have
>> > talked to people from many other multimedia projects and distributions.
>> > FFmpeg is very often viewed as a harsh and difficult environment with
>> > which communication is not easy and flames abound.
>> 
>> harsh/flames/... != hostile
>
> That's a matter of perception.  I do not see FFmpeg as hostile, but it
> surely can be intimidating for newcomers.  And I have spoken to many
> people who do consider FFmpeg hostile.
>
>> > > > So people are willing to put up with more hardship or simply are
>> > > > forced to work with FFmpeg one way or the other because they cannot
>> > > > switch to an alternative.
>> > > 
>> > > You should probably post a detailed list of what you think can be
>> > > improved
>> > > to ffmpeg-dev
>> > 
>> > I'm working on it all the time when I am in contact with other projects
>> > at LinuxTag, on IRC or wherever.  You may have noticed the Debian patch
>> > I forwarded to ffmpeg-devel.  I have been working with the new FFmpeg
>> > Debian maintainer these past few days reviewing their patchset.  With my
>> > help he could determine that half of the patches are no longer necessary
>> > and delete them.
>> 
>> Speaking of that, i really would appreciate if all distros which package
>> ffmpeg could send their patches to ffmpeg-dev.
>> It would be of mutual benefit
>> weeding out bad patches/bugs (which ruin ffmpegs good name as well as the
>> distros) is mainly what iam thinkibng of ...
>
> I 100% agree.  At every opportunity I get I try to work with packagers
> of FFmpeg and MPlayer, try to make them send patches upstream and
> generally stay in contact when any issues appear.
>
>> > > > > id like to point out how you complained about iive changing the
>> > > > > spelling of xvid. Which honestly is totally irrelevant compared to
>> > > > > changes to the code.
>> > > > 
>> > > > I did not complain about Ivan changing the spelling.  I complained
>> > > > about
>> > > > Ivan reverting my commit without prior notice.  If he had reverted
>> > > > just
>> > > > the files he maintains - fine.  But he chose to revert the files I
>> > > > maintain as well.  He did it on purpose.  This is obviously a
>> > > > provocation.
>> > > 
>> > > hypocrite ...
>> > 
>> > WTF?  Have we descended towards throwing around insults already?
>> 
>> didnt you say something about being old enough to not be provocated
>> easily just a few lines above?
>
> No.  I was talking about not being provoked by Ivan, at least not as
> easily as I used to.  That does not mean that I do not find being called
> a hypocrite by you insulting.
>
> So for the record: I do not consider myself a hypocrite and find the
> allegation very insulting.
>
>> Besides, hypocrite applies because you complain against iive while you
>> really
>> did nearly the same to him.
>
> No, I did not.  I did very much *not* revert his commits without any
> discussion or expressing dissent.
>
>> And it was actually intended to be more funny than insulting but ohh well
>> ...
>> Iam just ommiting the smilies because the ambiguity is funny in itself
>
> Well, if this discussion is not serious, then I suggest we close the
> issue and be done with it.  You are the one here behaving as if his life
> depended on the issues we are discussing.  How you can start being funny
> now and expect others to understand your hidden jokes is beyond me.
>
>> > > > How come that you don't have an issue with such behavior?
>> > > 
>> > > Lets see.
>> > > * I do not know at all if Xvid or XviD is more correct. I do know it
>> > > was
>> > >   XviD once in the past so this one can not be completely wrong now.
>> > > * You changed the spelling to Xvid in files maintained by you and ivve
>> > > * iive changed the spelling back to XviD in files maintained by you
>> > > and ivve
>> > > * he did the same you did, you started
>> > > * you broke the policy he reverted the commit which broke the policy
>> > > No the whole was not ideal but nothing bad happened we are just back
>> > > at the
>> > > start and have another chance to find a solution. If the spelling
>> > > bothers
>> > > you. Just start a discussion on mplayer-dev about it, like it should
>> > > IMHO
>> > > have been in the first place already.
>> > 
>> > Are you seriously suggesting that we should waste time on dev-eng
>> > discussing which way to spell Xvid?  When this was hashed out and
>> > committed to the rest of the documentation in 2006?
>> 
>> If not then why are you complaining about iive changing it? Either it
>> does matter or it does not ...
>
> I'll assume that you are neither playing one of your weird jokes again
> nor being deliberately dense and repeat my explanation:
>
> I'm not complaining about Ivan making the change.  I'm not even
> complaining about Ivan reverting my changes to his files.  However, when
> he reverts the changes I just did to files I maintain without prior
> notice or discussion and without even making me aware that he disagrees
> with my changes, then this is obviously and knowingly being done against
> my wishes and intentions and is bound to provoke and stir up
> controversy.

I did not made a "change". I reverted commit.
Commits are reverted as a whole.

I reverted the commit because few other developers had already questioned it.
I reverted the commit because it changed files I maintain without prior notice.
I reverted the commit because it mixed cosmetics (changes in comments) with functional changes (in strings and resulting binary).
I reverted the commit because as Maintainer of XviD I do have closer knowledge about what is going on there. I had given short prior notice in the original thread why I do the revert. It is my fault that it was short, I thought the prior objection were clear sign, and Diego is deliberately ignoring objections (like always).

I did my best to remain objective and to backup my decision with arguments.
Like that the codec itself is using the name XviD, no matter what the website says, (and wikipedia uses the site as reference). And this is for version that were released after the website change.

I could have used the rules as excuse, but I deliberately avoided doing so. 


Diego however tried to use the rules in his favor, claimed he maintains 3 files in this commit.
Then he went ahead and recommitted his changes in 6 files.