Quoting Paul B Mahol (2020-04-11 11:29:40) > On 4/11/20, Anton Khirnov <an...@khirnov.net> wrote: > > 100%? Meaning you think no patches should go to the mailing list? > > > > Or only some specific patches are exempt? Based on what criterion? And > > who applies it? > > And most importantly, why? > > Only trivial patches, like cosmetics of few lines, and this one above
In my experience the line between "trivial cosmetics" and "nontrivial changes" is very fuzzy and observer-dependent. Better to be safe and just send everything. It's not like there is a massive flood of trivial patches all the time. > and functional patches that clean ups code. Not sure what you mean here. "clean up" can mean refactoring patches, which can be highly fragile and should most certainly be reviewed when possible. > > Why? Because it adds too much burden for real review work on this mailing > list. It's certainly worth considering how to structure patch submission better, so that people do not need to wade through piles of emails that don't concern them. E.g. splitting the mailing lists into per-library, or implementing some sort of a tagging system or moving to some kind of a merge-request system come to mind. But I do not think directly pushing patches without any possibility of review is a good solution to this. -- Anton Khirnov _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
