Le torstaina 2. tammikuuta 2025, 16.17.31 EET Michael Niedermayer a écrit : > People will have shares proportional to their contribution to FFmpeg.
That would be a giant step backward in terms of "democratisation". In democracy, people have one vote. In terms of democratisation, you can argue who should or should not get a vote and for what. There are alternatives to the current methods that are worth considering, though none are perfect. But fixing a typo is not the same as implementing a whole new module. The proposed metric is dumb and ripe for abuse. As economists would put it, any metric that is tied to an incentive becomes practically meaningless. This is a well-documented problem in the corporate world. > Veto-holder > There is one veto holder, they can block decissions that > would cause harm to FFmpeg. That's also anything but democratic and a huge step backward. In general, I do believe that executive delegation is desirable to decide on day-to-day unimportant matters, but that would have to be an elected fixed-term position or a small board. What you propose is an hereditary dictatorship. No thanks. -- レミ・デニ-クールモン http://www.remlab.net/ _______________________________________________ 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".
