Hi, Le 4 février 2024 14:41:15 GMT+01:00, Michael Niedermayer <mich...@niedermayer.cc> a écrit : >Hi > >As said on IRC, i thought people knew it, but ‘the same person as before’ is >Thilo. > >Ive updated the price design suggestion for the merge task, its 16€ / commit >limited to 50k€ >this comes from looking at pauls fork which has around 500 commits in 2 months >thus >250 commits per month, 12 months, and if we allocate 50k that end with roughly >16€ / commit >if activity stays equal.
It's very different if we're talking about librempeg or some other unspecified fork. I could make a fork that removes MMX et al, and claim that I'm merging a fork. >The task has ATM no developer on it. If a developer adds himself, he can >change teh task >and specify what he proposes to merge. > >I am totally perplexed why every dot on every i is such a big thing. That is the whole point of a statement of work. And I agree that it's tedious and possibly outright annoying... Indeed I don't think that a semiformal open-source community with a lot of strong and varied opinions will carry such dotting of all i's very effectively. That has been one of the arguments for delegating this to a contracting IT company rather than to FFmpeg-devel and SPI. >We are doing GSoC for a decade and noone cared about voting about anything in >it. Again, I don't think it's a fair comparison. GSoC rules are a given set by Google. Maintenance is not allowed nor are vague broadly defined tasks. Also the mentor payment is not really a proper compensation, nor is it intended to be. >The difference here is FFmpeg developers are benefiting from the money. That's a pretty major difference. >We send an application and a scope of work. That's exactly why we need to have a precise scope of work to vote on this. _______________________________________________ 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".
