Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2024-02-27 17:55:30) > On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 08:20:30AM +0100, Anton Khirnov wrote: > > Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2024-02-26 23:47:20) > > > > > > Look at the 3 patches i just posted. > > > I suspect we can move alot closer to what you suggest without a vote but > > > simply by consensus > > > > Your patches use a 'must' wording, > > Then please reply to them and explain your point, why the wording > is bad, what alternative wording you suggest and why thats better. > Its a patch, we discuss patches here on ffmpeg-devel
Hijacking other people's patches without their consent is what we do NOT do though. > > while multiple people would prefer a > > 'should'. > > > > > But even more importantly, you are leaving the disputed line as is, so > > it's not solving the problem at all. > > The questions about > 1. allowing votes under conflict of interrest > 2. if votes must be in the best interrest of the project > 3. if one can vote on their own disagreements > ... > > are 3+ seperate things. > > You are trying to pack good changes with a change that allows one to > vote on ones own disagreements. And you are trying to pass your personal opinions on which changes are good (and by implication which are not-good) as objective facts. I wish you'd stop doing that. I presented an argument for why *in my opinion* there is no problem with TC members voting on their own patches. You are welcome to disagree, but that is exactly why I am proposing a vote. -- 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".
