On 11/8/2017 5:52 PM, Paul B Mahol wrote: > On 11/8/17, Nicolas George <geo...@nsup.org> wrote: >> L'octidi 18 brumaire, an CCXXVI, Hendrik Leppkes a ecrit : >>> In the meantime, it does no real harm to add one more sidedata type to >>> the numerous list of types we already have, and lets people carry on >>> with their work. >> >> It does harm, look at the other patch: 5 lines of useless clutter out of >> 10 lines for the feature, using side data for that features has a 100% >> overhead. >> >> And that is not only for the code here, it has the same consequences for >> the applications that will use that API as well: they have to do the >> same errors checks, they have to handle a type-pruned pointer, check the >> size of the data, etc. This is a terrible API, there is no doubt that >> people would prefer a single field. >> >> By all means let us discuss all this. But if Paul maintains his veto, I >> maintain mine. Please persuade Paul to behave like an adult of make good >> on his trice-repeated promise of forking. > > Maybe I promised a fork, but looks like people are already forking FFmpeg > because of people like you, latest one being ffmpeg-mpv. > > There should be new call for voting commitee to drop you, Michael and Carl > from veto voting commitee. You guys should not block others work.
Please, everyone, it's a PNG patch. Why are any of you even remotely ok with turning it into a project flamewar? _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
