On 2/25/2025 10:51 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
Hi Marth64On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 05:04:00PM -0600, Marth64 wrote:Dear FFmpeg Community, We’d like to share an update on the work of the Community Committee (CC). Starting this week, we will hold a weekly internal panel to discuss community matters and ensure more structured issue resolution. One of our key goals is to address some of the lingering discussions from 2024 while laying a strong foundation for the future. We recognize that progress will be gradual, but we are committed to working as a team and presenting unified messaging to improve communication and transparency. We expect to deliver communications soon on some issues. We look forward to continuing to serve the FFmpeg community and fostering a collaborative and productive environment. Thank you for your ongoing support and engagement. On behalf of the CC,There are 3+ parts here 1. I agree we need discussions, transparency and maybe IRC or some other audio/video form of commuication can be tried. Such discussion should be public and open. And they must include admins and main authors. 2. The CC is overstepping its authority.
How? What part of the above makes you think that? He only stated they are now discussing and going through the 2024 stuff.
3. There is a huge growing backlog of increasing development issues
Yes, he said as much.
id like to work on without having to fight and argue over governance
Id like to backport security fixes, make new releases.
About "internal panel", There should not be a "internal panel" dominated
by videolan developers discussing FFmpeg. If there is such a panel, it
should be the main authors, the people who did spend a significant time
of their life working on FFmpeg. (and you should be included as you seem
good at this, and i should be in it because iam one of the main authors
amongth other things)
If you wanted to be part of the CC and its deliberations, why didn't you volunteer for it during last vote? You were in the previous CC, and you would have surely been among the five voted if so.
For what is worth, you, even if not part of the CC but as the one that made several accusations (and the target of another bunch), could request to be part of the deliberations regarding those specific issues. Is this codified anywhere? If not, it could be drafted and a vote be held for such addition.
Thank you PS: this is just my initial thought/reply and i may have a better idea after sleeping over this [...] _______________________________________________ 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".
