On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 9:17 AM, Paul B Mahol <one...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 3/1/16, Ronald S. Bultje <rsbul...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 8:04 AM, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceho...@ag.or.at> wrote: >> >>> Ronald S. Bultje <rsbultje <at> gmail.com> writes: >>> >>> > > So how does this mechanism look like for the requested >>> > > use case? >>> > >>> > man ln. >>> >>> As said, this is a completely ridiculous argument: >>> FFmpeg has always tried to provide new features, no >>> matter if other solutions existed or not. >> >> >> When you don't get your way, just shout "ridiculous!" and all will be okay. > > Its just few loc. I see nothing wrong with it, lets vote!
+1 to voting - why don't we actually put the developer committee to use instead of arguing about it? > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-devel mailing list > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
