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

[compn]

On Sat, 10 May 2008 22:38:07 +0200 Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> wrote:

> On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 02:20:15PM +0200, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
> > Hello,
> > On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 01:38:06PM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > > diego           1038     504     1542
> > > reimar           690     246      936
> > > voroshil         312       8      320
> > > nico             212      43      255
> > > benjamin         144      32      176
> > > ulion            153      13      166
> > > eugeni           106      56      162
> > > uoti              99      20      119
> > > guillaume         93      24      117
> > > compn             97      16      113
> > > cehoyos           89       8       97
> > > ivo               65       4       69
> > > zuxy              55      12       67
> > > vayne             14       3       17
> > > corey              9       6       15
> > > attila            10       5       15
> > > loren             11       2       13
> > > rik                1       3        4
> > 
> > Before anyone flames too hard: I asked for Diego to publish these
> > numbers.
> > The problem is, as some of those appearing later have shown, that we
> > have no opinions from some important people.
> > Thing is, I really want everyone to stay on this project and happily
> > work together. Not sure if that is possible anymore - and in that case
> > I want a more objective overview of the opinions that I currently have.
> > To summarize the dilemma for me personally: I very much respect and
> > agree with most of Michael's opinions, but there are a few problems:
> 
> > They basically result in a FFmpeg-style review policy. That works really
> > great most of the time for FFmpeg, but I think it just can not work with
> > MPlayer currently, we do not have enough people willing to do that kind
> > of effort to get patches included.
> 
> ffmpegs policy text was copied from mplayers ...
> besides i think the effort which would have been needed to cleanly commit
> the few controversal things would not have been that huge.
> 
> 
> > So from that perspective I do think it might be better for the long term
> > good to basically let Uoti (and also other future developers) work mostly
> > on their own conditions (though I seriously wish for a bit more consideration
> > for other people from his side).
> 
> This attitude was what lead to the mess mplayer is currently.
> Uoti can argue that the rules about indention caused bugs, sec holes and so
> on but its obvious that the lack of proper reviews and rejection of bad
> patches and commits was much more responsible for it.
> If you now allow commits which mix cosmetics and functional changes and
> other unreviewable mixes. Then this will only make mplayer a even bigger
> mess than it already is.
> And even if uoti never makes a mistake in his unreviewable commits,
> others will follow and work under the same rules. These other people will
> make mistakes and introduce many bugs.

fwir of mplayer development, i agree 100% with this.
but i also remember diego saying (i think!) that it was possible
to have a human readable diff from a cosmetic+functional change

would it be possible, and fix this issue, if the -cvslog diffs
were made human readable?

-compn