On Mon, Sep 9, 2024 at 1:23 PM Timo Rothenpieler <t...@rothenpieler.org> wrote:
> On 09/09/2024 12:02, Anton Khirnov wrote: > > Quoting Rémi Denis-Courmont (2024-09-09 09:32:07) > >> Hi, > >> > >> Le 8 septembre 2024 19:57:38 GMT+03:00, Timo Rothenpieler < > t...@rothenpieler.org> a écrit : > >>> > >>> Well, the reality is, that without printing all these warnings, nobody > will ever fix them. > >>> Unless someone sits down and spends potentially multiple days if not > weeks of work to fix all the current ones. > >> > >>> > >>> If we print all the warnings instead, it can get fixed gradually. > >> > >> I can only agree with Zhao and Andreas here. If you want to turn a > warning flag on, you have to eliminate the warnings first. > >> > >> Otherwise you're just drowning the existing and typically more serious > warnings in a sea of new warnings. The result is obvious: people will just > ignore *all* warnigns then, and that's worse. > > > > +1 > > > > I don't have time to fix 1000+ warnings, so this is just blocked then. > Maybe this could be a task to be sponsored with the STF funds? -- Vittorio _______________________________________________ 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".
