Michael Niedermayer (12025-01-07): > Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <mich...@niedermayer.cc> > --- > doc/faq.texi | 8 ++++++++ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/doc/faq.texi b/doc/faq.texi > index 54c3fbb41fe..70002a8156d 100644 > --- a/doc/faq.texi > +++ b/doc/faq.texi > @@ -702,4 +702,12 @@ In recent years, a significant number of developers > contributing to the project > unlike in the past. These employees are often compensated for specific > tasks, and the voting rights, > much like the copyrights, can typically be controlled by their employers. > > +@section What is the future plan for FFmpeg Governance? > + > +Governance has 2 goals, 1st to make good decissions for FFmpeg. And 2nd is > to create > +an inclusive and motivating environment where contributors feel valued and > inspired to > +collaborate. The plan is to find out how to achieve these goals. > +For example for a system to make good decissions it needs to be hard to > manipulate > + > +
I agree with others that this is not a good idea. If a feature has a severe security flaw like that, then we should not document that security flaw prominently, it might give ideas to people who had not noticed.ยน The feature should be just disabled until it is fixed; and if fixing it is not possible because the security flaw is inherent then the feature should just be dropped, possibly to be replaced by a completely different approach. Same goes for patch #2 in this series. 1: For the same reason, I have always refrained from explaining how to legally ship GPL ffmpeg with a proprietary binary. Regards, -- Nicolas George _______________________________________________ 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".
