On Sun, 4 Mar 2018 20:18:49 +0100, Hendrik Leppkes <h.lepp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Everyone is entitled to their opinion and their own politics, but you > should also be respectful of those that do not want politics involved > in FFmpeg. Its not the place for it. software patents directly affect ffmpeg, should we ignore that? I still have not seen an argument for why politics should not be involved on ffmpeg. only some strawman argument about kittens on youtube. > Do we add political statements about some internet-related happenings > from other countries as well then? Why limit this to the US only? If > we have one popup, we might as well have 5? no one limited our website statements to US-only. There have only been two statements by ffmpeg on non-ffmpeg internet items in the past 10+ years, looking at the news and archived news. http://ffmpeg.org/archive.html November 20, 2011 FFmpeg supports the fight against American Internet censorship. and then the widget we are discussing today. I see some people complaining about so much politics, but two posts in 10 years ? that is what you are upset about ? please help me understand your problem with this. Aside from these, which i think everyone is in agreement with. 1. popup ad is annoying , news entry would be better 2. no reason to have a popup page on the docs pages. i'm not trying to be dismissive, i want to understand. please explain the problem. also no one has said why net neutrality is political at all. its a technical problem, and ffmpeg is all about technical problems. ssl heartbleed was a technical problem that was also posted to our news page. i dont remember the vitriol about that ssl news post. -compn _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
