On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 07:10:39PM -0300, James Almer wrote: > On 12/22/2016 2:16 PM, Nicolas George wrote: > > Le duodi 2 nivôse, an CCXXV, James Almer a écrit : > >> You still have time to address the arguments from wm4's review you > >> skipped in your previous reply. You only sort-of answered to the "Is > >> all this complexity really justified?" question. > > > > All the rest was only sub-questions to the big one: details about the > > complexity. My answer stands: yes, all this complexity is justified, > > every bit of it. > > > > If you, or anybody else, want explanations on a certain detail, you can > > ask, and I will answer. > > > > If wm4 wants explanations, "get used to disappointment". > > > > Or, to state it a different way: I consider "yes, all this complexity is > > justified" to be the definite answer to all of wm4's remarks in this > > discussion. If anybody else thinks some of wm4's remarks need > > addressing, make them your own. From my point of view, wm4 no longer > > exists in this discussion. > > Then you're not addressing them, and this patch was pushed while a blocking > review remained unaddressed. > The proper course of action now would be to revert this commit. Unless of > course you decide to finally addressed his review. And I'm not saying you > have to unconditionally change your code, simply addressing his arguments > and explaining why the code is ok as is would be enough, assuming your reply > and arguments remain unchallenged. > Basically, the usual stuff when dealing with a review, something you have > done plenty of times before but seem determined not to this time. > > You need to learn how to work in an collaborative project, and general > environments where you have to interact with people. You have no right to > ignore another dev's review and even go as far as state you'd consider his > arguments if they were made by someone else. > Your behavior is simply unacceptable and should be grounds for removing > your pushing rights at the very least.
I wish everyone would work together, its christmess also 2 things here 1. Is there a technical problem in the code in git ? 2. Is there a non technical problem ? both should be solved somehow! People should work together to solve all issues! 3. Is there a disagreement on how to do something technical ? If so i belive that the people activly working on the code in question (called the maintainers) should make a decission 4. If people belive we need rules to ban developers, then they should start a discussion and vote about such rules when everyone is calm and rational (not now and never about individuals but a rule that everyone is equally subject to). everyone, Love more, hate less, please! -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB There will always be a question for which you do not know the correct answer.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
