On Thu, Jan 2, 2025 at 9:17 AM Michael Niedermayer <mich...@niedermayer.cc> wrote:
> Hi all > > I was working in the last few days a little on drafting a democratization > process > > Heres the current draft: (very preliminary and will certainly change alot) > also I still need to find out, if more than 3 developer actually care > about this > > But either way, this is intended to be an open and public process not a > process behind closed doors > > Iam posting this mainly to show that i have not been ignoring the call for > democratization > (originally wanted to wait longer so its more fleshed out before posting > but well, posting > now, maybe it makes some people happier) > > Summary: > People will have shares proportional to their contribution to FFmpeg. > The voting power will depend on how recent the last commit was. And > the main > author will have a veto right and a 2/3 majority will be needed for > "Constitutional" changes. > Persistent trolls can be excluded from becoming shareholders. > As new contributions are made, new shares will be created. This will > happen on a quarterly base. > > Shares: > 1 commit in git master branch == 1 shares > 1 fixed ticket in trac == > 1 mail in ffmpeg-devel == > > Time Multiplier: > Provides an incentive to return and contribute again, > favors recently active contributors > > Majority > Constitutional changes require 2/3 majority > > Veto-holder > There is one veto holder, they can block decissions that > would cause harm to FFmpeg. The veto holder must always > have named a successor. In case the chain of successors > breaks. The available person with most authored commits in git master > becomes the new veto holder. > > thx > Micheal, you're trying to solve a personal problem with technology and that is never a good thing. Also please consider what kind of reputation we are providing for this community, do you think a n-th thread discussing democratization will attract more or less developers? After all the drama and bickering on the mailing list in the previous months? Democracy means sometimes accepting a decision you're not agreeing with, and sometimes letting your friends be punished because they violated the rules. If what you wrote in [0] is true and you really want people to work on ffmpeg in peace, then let the established democratic tools we have perform their duty. https://lists.ffmpeg.org//pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2024-December/338053.html -- 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".
