On 12/21/2023 5:05 PM, Paul B Mahol wrote:
On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 8:43 PM Tomas Härdin <g...@haerdin.se> wrote:
ons 2023-12-20 klockan 20:11 +0100 skrev Michael Niedermayer:
On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 05:57:40PM +0100, Tomas Härdin wrote:
tis 2023-12-19 klockan 15:02 +0100 skrev Nicolas George:
[...]
[...] , but every line of code
carries with it a non-zero maintenance burden
Assuming you mean with "non-zero" a "larger than zero" maintenance
burden
then we can proof this to be false
Doubt
What iam trying to say is, the maintaince burden resulting from a
change
is complex
Indeed
In this specific case here we have a patch proposing the removial of
a decoder
missing a test.
Its easy to say the burden is less when the decoder is removed
But its author recently left the project too
This is one problem. But the careless attitude to shoving more features
into the codebase is far more serious. Every line of code is a CVE
waiting to happen. Apparently this is a difficult thing to grasp for
some contributors. It's an attitude I expect only from junior
developers.
Ensuring C code is correct and safe is *hard*. I have spent time
formally verifying embedded C code for spaceflight. The lessons learned
from this has made me supremely suspicious of cowboy coding.
I have raised this issue multiple times in this project to no avail. I
do not expect things to change.
Say what serious feature you contributed ? - Nothing.
First of all, this was completely uncalled for. Second, mxf support in
lavf is pretty much thanks to him.
_______________________________________________
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".
