On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 11:50:30AM +0200, Nicolas George wrote: > softworkz . (HE12025-05-16): > > Sadly, this is once another feature from which FFmpeg > > developers are thinking that you should not have it. > > > > I have tried my best, but I have no interest in endless > > arguing and upsetting everybody, so this feature dies > > here officially. > > Or you could find alternate method of implementing it that do not have > the flaws
yes if thats possible, iam not sure everyone will agree though > that your senior developers have pointed. I think "your senior developers" is a bit provocative and this mailing list has demonstrated its ability to melt down quite spectacularly so lets just avoid being provocative in a way thats not positive > > Your choice: play the victim or accept counsel. Can we please keep the thread technical the patch was already reverted and theres already a clear majority against system() calls. We are making good progress with everyone working towards finding solutions for all issues uncovered (some of which are in the review process that missed this patch which was posted 12 times over 1 month) thx [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB Never trust a computer, one day, it may think you are the virus. -- Compn
signature.asc
Description: PGP 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".
