On 11/19/2021 11:34 AM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 3:25 PM Anton Khirnov <an...@khirnov.net> wrote:
Quoting Paul B Mahol (2021-11-19 15:07:13)
On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 3:04 PM Anton Khirnov <an...@khirnov.net> wrote:
Quoting Paul B Mahol (2021-11-19 14:55:42)
On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 2:27 PM Michael Niedermayer <
mich...@niedermayer.cc>
wrote:
On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 02:18:27PM +0100, Anton Khirnov wrote:
Quoting James Almer (2021-11-13 13:22:12)
Also, missing docs.
Could we add a development rule that all new filters need docs
and
all
new filters/codecs/(de)muxers need a test (unless special
circumstances,
like hwaccel)?
Iam in favor of this
Against this, as experimental filters does not need docs,
I strongly disagree, even experimental code needs docs. I often find it
good idea to write documentation _before_ writing the code.
Besides, experimental filters do not belong in the main repository.
Keep
them in your tree until stop being experimental.
Never, I will keep posting filters without docs on devel mailing list as
I
wish.
Any such patches are rejected.
I post patches to get constructive reviews and feedback, but sometimes
I receive only hate and bait to fight back.
You got a review with some feedback from myself for this patch. How it
ended up with you reacting like this after i asked you to document the
filter beats me.
_______________________________________________
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".
