Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12020-09-08): > I think the explanation is quite aggressive and has absolutely nothing > to do inside a git log, to be honest. > > The fact that you disagree on the commit is fine, but being passive > aggressive on a commit log is not OK, in my humble opinion. Especially > when it will be in the history forever, and cannot be removed.
I can agree with that. I do not perceive what I have written to be passive aggressive; if it is, it is the least to express the reasons for the revert. And yes, I will admit without dissimulation my frustration with Paul's attitude towards me and towards other people in the project. Not taking them into account would be tantamount to validating them. If it tainted the wording of the commit message, then I am to blame, but so are Paul and everybody who let him do much worse for a long time. > Moreover, a revert should go through the mailing list like normal > patches, and that's again, my opinion. Under ideal circumstances, I would agree, but these are not normal circumstances. But these are not normal circumstances, this commit was pushed without review (I was about to review it when I noticed it has already been pushed), by somebody who repeatedly threatens to abuse their commit rights to push without approval, but will gladly leverage rules we have in place to protect themselves. Under these circumstances, an immediate revert was the only viable path. This commit is harmful, it takes us farther from a proper implementation of the movie source and would have delayed proper work on it. Despite your remark, I still consider an immediate revert was the best choice. Regards, -- Nicolas George
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ 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".
