Hi Michael, On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Michael Behrisch <o...@behrisch.de> wrote:
> Am 17.10.2016 um 15:29 schrieb Michael Niedermayer: > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 01:34:55PM +0200, wm4 wrote: > >> On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 13:09:36 +0200 > >> Michael Niedermayer <mich...@niedermayer.cc> wrote: > >> > >>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:07:42AM +0200, Nicolas George wrote: > >>>> Le sextidi 26 vendémiaire, an CCXXV, Michael Niedermayer a écrit : > >>>>> probably, yes > >>>> > >>>> I would have said exactly the opposite. It is nothing but a waste of > time > >>>> and a pollution of the history. > >>> > >>> My idea here is to maximize the number of developers > >>> And if in cases where one doesnt really care much either way and > >>> someone else seems caring more one says, "ok" that may result in a > happy > >>> new contributor. > >>> Saying "no" is more likely to turn someone away. > >>> and again, it doesnt really matter if the , is there after a > >>> final sentinel /count entry as no next field would ever be added > >> > >> Are you kidding me. Patches should be judged on their technical merrit, > >> not whether you might piss someone off by rejecting it. > > > > this is about a cosmetic change having no real technical effect > > So here are my cosmetics for libavutil. It simply helps with keeping > track of real warnings in downstream projects. Why are you using -Wpedantic? Most people use warnings as a way for the compiler to inform them of potential bugs in their code; has -Wpedantic ever helped you find bugs? Ronald _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
