On Tue, 21 Jan 2025 18:48:01 +0100 Michael Niedermayer <mich...@niedermayer.cc> wrote: > Hi James > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 01:22:52PM -0300, James Almer wrote: > > On 1/21/2025 12:54 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > > Hi > > > > > > On 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. > > we can force non anonymous voting, this isnt the main concern > > > > > > 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.
I am in favor of Frank's suggestion above to defer the formal vote until *after* the trial period. > > > > > > > > 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. > > that can be done too or a condorcet of gitlab/Forgejo/ML patches can be done > > my concern is that the community is not just 49 people. > > and before people attack me. the choice of Forgejo/gitlab/git send email > affects > many more than 49 people. Every person submiting a patch or contribution is > affected. In fact everyone on ffmpeg-devel is bascially I conjecture that the vast majority of occasional and drive-by contributors either would not care what platform we use, or will actively prefer a web-based forge. In either case, I don't think we need to worry too much about the opinions of anybody other than active contributors and core maintainers, for which the GA is a sufficient proxy. > > thx > > [...] > > -- > Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB > > Avoid a single point of failure, be that a person or equipment. > _______________________________________________ > 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". _______________________________________________ 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".
