On 1/21/2025 12:54 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
HiOn Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 01:04:45PM +0100, Niklas Haas wrote:On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 14:39:29 -0600 Marth64 <mart...@proxyid.net> wrote:Hello, in the context of a GA member, I think there is general interest in modernizing technical tooling specifically regarding ML/patch workflow vs. integrated git solution. Both have their merits. I think what we have today is optimized for some but cumbersome for many. Like shopping for a drill, it is good to step back from time to time and ensure we have the right tools. I think the problem statement of productivity being impacted from outgrowing the current tooling is different from who is hosting it. These are some options I noticed interest in (in no particular order): - Forgejo - GitLab - Mailing List/Patch Workflow (current solution)Since our last discussion at VDD, I have come to prefer Forgejo over GitLab and would be in favor of hosting an instance on ffmpeg.org.What are the current barriers to doing this. Michael, since you said that you are in favor iff the community agrees with it, should we start a GA vote on the matter?I would instead of a secret GA vote, maybe wait a few days for discussion to settle down and then just ask people on the ML about (yes vs no) (strong vs weak) and a short paragraph about a switch to Forgejo
We can always start a Condorcet vote where the requirement is that only non-anonymous votes are considered, if you think that will help (Maybe it can even be forced to actually cast your vote?). A vote using mail replies in a thread with yes/no is hard to follow.
Also, the vote can happen after a thread with replies stating support for one or another solution, with optional argumentation if there's something to say that hasn't been said already.
As well as a 2nd question: namely on the threshold should we switch if we have 51% ? or no strong opposition ? or how to draw the line?
Ideally, there would be two votes. One to open the question if we move away from ML patches, and then one to choose between Forgejo/Gitlab, if the first vote succeeds. But i don't know if people will be ok with that.
Also, should we switch if we loose some developers by doing so? Its possible that will give us a clear consensus already If not, taking another look at the comments from people strongly opposing in context of yes/no votes in general seems worthy. Either way i think if this ends with 45% vs 55% i would feel uneasy I would like to see a clear preferrance of the community, something like 20% vs 80%. I think a simple count of yes/no strong/weak and what threshold people prefer seems enough and it seems like "richer" in information. If this doesnt work out we can just try again in 3 months and if it fails again we can still go for some hard formal vote. And maybe by the time we will have cleared up some of the governance disagreementsCan Timo set it up and maintain it for us?IIUC timo can do it but he should reply himself i think thx [...] _______________________________________________ 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".
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ 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".
