wm4: > Nice snarky, content-free remark. But you know that just because a hack got > "blessed" because it has "verified users", this is not a reason to implement > things in the right way, so that they are also maintainable and orthogonal.
Do you intend to propose a patch that implements things "the right way", "orthogonal", in less than, let's say, two years? If not, do not criticize people who propose something that works. > (Or what do you tell to a user who wants to add hardsubbing captions to his > existing transcode commandline? Have fun.) Maybe I tell them to wait until the genius wm4 has condescended to implement it. My patches, either for sub2video or for subcc in movie, are indeed ugly hacks, I never denied it. But they work, right now, and they are of service to users. Furthermore, they are isolated features, without tendrils all over the place, without causing unrelated problems and ready to be removed when a proper implementation is committed. By disparaging them, you are insulting both me and every user who uses the features. There are very few people whose contributions are so invaluable that the community has to bear with their rudeness. Regards, -- Nicolas George
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
