On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 11:33:29AM -0300, James Almer wrote: > On 4/24/2017 3:27 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 11:23:16AM -0300, James Almer wrote: > >> On 4/23/2017 11:07 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > >>> Hi all > >>> > >>> Should changes ported from libav (what we call merges) be reviewed > >>> before being pushed? > >> > >> The lot of merges are simple things like "Fix this bug that was already > >> fixed in ffmpeg months ago", "K&R", etc. Lately we are even no-oping a > >> good amount of them as they don't even apply. > > > >> Only a small set of merges are big API changes, and those are always > >> handled by more than one developer, either by reviewing the changes, > >> testing them or by helping getting the thing working. And of course, any > >> bug that was not caught before pushing is fixed afterwards. > >> In fact, it should be noted that if they are initially skipped for > >> requiring more thought and for blocking unrelated merges, when we get > >> them working at a latter point we always send them to the ML instead of > >> simply pushing them. > > > > yes > > > > could you send more changes to the ML instead of just ones > > initially skiped ? (and of course i dont mean trivial / clearly correct > > stuff) > > If I'm the one merging some change that has considerable chances of > introducing regressions, then sure.
Thanks ! [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face. -- Diogenes of Sinope
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
