Dear FFmpeg community,
The CC is asking for a brief pause (24-48hrs?) in this thread. It's become
quite heated and we don't think this is good for anyone. After that, feel
free to continue discussing libpostproc's split-out in this thread or other
subjects in their own respective threads.
Thank y
Le tiistaina 26. marraskuuta 2024, 16.14.22 EET Nicolas George a écrit :
> It took me time to realize the harm your kind of governance did to
> FFmpeg, but now it is quite obvious.
There is a lot of criticism made* or to be made of JB's open-source community
governance. As far as I know, there re
Hi jb
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 02:41:02PM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, at 14:11, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > But thats not what iam talking about
> >
> > with "eternal debates" i mean things like discussions about
> >
> > * the value of tests (yes they are val
On 11/26/2024 6:25 AM, Nicolas George wrote:
Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12024-11-26):
Once again you attack people directly on threads.
« your kind of » ≠ « you », please do not abuse code of conduct rules to
silence discourse that you want to silence. It is part of the kind of
governance that is ha
Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12024-11-26):
> Once again you attack people directly on threads.
« your kind of » ≠ « you », please do not abuse code of conduct rules to
silence discourse that you want to silence. It is part of the kind of
governance that is harming the project.
--
“I dont see why” isnt
Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12024-11-26):
> Open Source encompasses Libre Software for years, and is a superset.
Juridically, yes. Philosophically, absolutely not. Open Source is about
making profit with software while still providing the source code. Libre
Software is about making good code ans sharing
On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, at 15:14, Nicolas George wrote:
> Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12024-11-26):
>
>
> Replying to this would be a waste of time.
>
> It took me time to realize the harm your kind of governance did to
> FFmpeg, but now it is quite obvious.
Once again you attack people directly on thre
Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12024-11-26):
Replying to this would be a waste of time.
It took me time to realize the harm your kind of governance did to
FFmpeg, but now it is quite obvious.
--
Nicolas George
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpe
On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, at 14:59, Nicolas George wrote:
> Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12024-11-26):
>> Open Source encompasses Libre Software for years, and is a superset.
>
> Juridically, yes. Philosophically, absolutely not. Open Source is about
> making profit with software while still providing the so
Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12024-11-26):
> This is what managing an open source project is about, or if you prefer, open
> source governance.
> We understand you don't like open source project management.
FFmpeg is Libre Software, not Open Source.
The fact that you try to manage it as Open Source migh
On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, at 14:49, Nicolas George wrote:
> Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12024-11-26):
>> This is what managing an open source project is about, or if you prefer,
>> open source governance.
>> We understand you don't like open source project management.
>
> FFmpeg is Libre Software, not Open So
Hi
On Tue, 26 Nov 2024, at 14:11, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> But thats not what iam talking about
>
> with "eternal debates" i mean things like discussions about
>
> * the value of tests (yes they are valuable), teh discussion here yet
> ended with some people refusing to add tests, and in ano
Hi Anton
On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 05:38:13AM +0100, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2024-11-11 00:06:12)
> > The reason for me to consider to split libpostproc out is to be able to
> > work on the code without the eternal debates here. So i need it to be
> > maintainable and i n
On 11/25/2024 1:43 AM, Anton Khirnov wrote:
Quoting Tomas Härdin (2024-11-08 11:44:03)
15k sounds like money better spent on something else, for example
improving the build system.
What actual problems are there with our build systems. It works better
than most and is quite easily hackable.
> On Nov 25, 2024, at 12:43, Anton Khirnov wrote:
>
> Quoting Tomas Härdin (2024-11-08 11:44:03)
>> 15k sounds like money better spent on something else, for example
>> improving the build system.
>
> What actual problems are there with our build systems. It works better
> than most and is qui
Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2024-11-11 00:06:12)
> The reason for me to consider to split libpostproc out is to be able to
> work on the code without the eternal debates here. So i need it to be
> maintainable and i need it to support a wider range of filters.
In other words you would like to use
Quoting Tomas Härdin (2024-11-08 11:44:03)
> 15k sounds like money better spent on something else, for example
> improving the build system.
What actual problems are there with our build systems. It works better
than most and is quite easily hackable.
> good build systems
What is this mythical b
Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2024-11-08 17:17:42)
> On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 11:44:03AM +0100, Tomas Härdin wrote:
> > tor 2024-11-07 klockan 00:11 +0100 skrev Michael Niedermayer:
> > > Hi all
> > >
> > > Should libpostproc be split out into a seperate source repository ?
> > >
> > > Several peop
Le perjantaina 22. marraskuuta 2024, 15.38.32 EET Michael Niedermayer a écrit
:
> > I think that is a fair criticism - I agree we're generally too slow,
> > actually I think most/all of us agree there. I'd like to improve that.
> > "We're working on it."
>
> +1
>
> yes, i do infact think that af
On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 8:38 AM Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 08:09:49AM -0500, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 7:59 AM wrote:
> >
> > > the (at least perceived) inaction of the CC in other cases makes this
> seem
> > > the CC has a h
Hi
On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 08:09:49AM -0500, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 7:59 AM wrote:
>
> > the (at least perceived) inaction of the CC in other cases makes this seem
> > the CC has a huge double standard how to deal with things…
>
>
> I think that is a fair cr
Ronald S. Bultje (12024-11-22):
> Right, and then there's that. Maybe we can start with the inaction bit
> (it's easier to address, I think). But I'm open to further process
> suggestions.
For starters, I would mention that in various judicial proceedings
accused have a right to know who is accusi
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 7:59 AM wrote:
> the (at least perceived) inaction of the CC in other cases makes this seem
> the CC has a huge double standard how to deal with things…
I think that is a fair criticism - I agree we're generally too slow,
actually I think most/all of us agree there.
On 11/22/2024 12:59 PM, epira...@gmail.com wrote:
> While I might not in principle disagree with the CCs action here, the (at
> least perceived) inaction of the CC
> in other cases makes this seem the CC has a huge double standard how to deal
> with things…
> (Or there is a big communication/tran
pened on this list since and *this*
> is the result is, for lack of a better work, complete bullshit.
>
> The CC is a lame duck.
>
> - Derek
>
>
> Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] libpostproc splitout
> Date: Thu, 21
Le maanantaina 11. marraskuuta 2024, 1.06.12 EET Michael Niedermayer a écrit :
> > On the other hand, if we assume that it does not get separated, I think
> > the lack of activity tells about the impopularity of the library. I don't
> > see the point in spending time and/or money if nobody cares an
Hi Remi
On Sat, Nov 09, 2024 at 08:21:24PM +0200, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
> Le lauantaina 9. marraskuuta 2024, 18.11.07 EET Michael Niedermayer a écrit :
> > > And sorry but while I am all for splitting postproc to a separate
> > > repository, it is at best a few hundreds euros worth of consult
On 11/7/2024 11:33 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> And as a sidenote I and Derek where much friendlier towards each
> other from what i remember, than in the discussion today. I hope we will be
> friendlier towards each other in the future again.
On the contrary, I remember being a much, much big
Le lauantaina 9. marraskuuta 2024, 18.11.07 EET Michael Niedermayer a écrit :
> > And sorry but while I am all for splitting postproc to a separate
> > repository, it is at best a few hundreds euros worth of consulting time.
> > The difficult part, if there is one, is to reach the agreement to do i
On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 08:00:50PM +0200, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
> Le torstaina 7. marraskuuta 2024, 22.04.04 EET Michael Niedermayer a écrit :
> > On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 02:48:13PM +, Derek Buitenhuis wrote:
> > > On 11/6/2024 11:11 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > > 3. actually r
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 6:56 PM Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 01:15:41PM -0500, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 11:45 AM Michael Niedermayer <
> mich...@niedermayer.cc>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 11:23:49AM -0500, Ronald
On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 01:15:41PM -0500, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 11:45 AM Michael Niedermayer
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 11:23:49AM -0500, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 11:17 AM Michael Niedermayer <
> > mich...@niedermayer.cc>
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 11:45 AM Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 11:23:49AM -0500, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 11:17 AM Michael Niedermayer <
> mich...@niedermayer.cc>
> > > my wish would be that the 15k could be spend on a plugin interface
> > > fo
Le perjantaina 8. marraskuuta 2024, 18.45.29 EET Michael Niedermayer a écrit :
> > Wes from Meta gave a talk about this at VDD2024.
>
> is there a recording ?
> do you have a link ?
I think that day was recorded, but it will probably take a while before the
videos are processed and released by t
Le torstaina 7. marraskuuta 2024, 22.04.04 EET Michael Niedermayer a écrit :
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 02:48:13PM +, Derek Buitenhuis wrote:
> > On 11/6/2024 11:11 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > 3. actually remove libpostproc from master repository (2025 future)
> > > (send to SPI
On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 11:23:49AM -0500, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 11:17 AM Michael Niedermayer
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 11:44:03AM +0100, Tomas Härdin wrote:
> > > tor 2024-11-07 klockan 00:11 +0100 skrev Michael Niedermayer:
> > > > Hi all
> > > >
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 11:17 AM Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 11:44:03AM +0100, Tomas Härdin wrote:
> > tor 2024-11-07 klockan 00:11 +0100 skrev Michael Niedermayer:
> > > Hi all
> > >
> > > Should libpostproc be split out into a seperate source repository ?
> > >
> >
On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 11:44:03AM +0100, Tomas Härdin wrote:
> tor 2024-11-07 klockan 00:11 +0100 skrev Michael Niedermayer:
> > Hi all
> >
> > Should libpostproc be split out into a seperate source repository ?
> >
> > Several people did over the years want libpostproc removed, and such
> > a t
tor 2024-11-07 klockan 00:11 +0100 skrev Michael Niedermayer:
> Hi all
>
> Should libpostproc be split out into a seperate source repository ?
>
> Several people did over the years want libpostproc removed, and such
> a task was part of the submitted and approved STF 2024 projects.
> But when i r
On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 3:34 PM Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
> Hi Vittorio
>
Hi Michael
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 01:07:26PM -0800, Vittorio Giovara wrote:
> This discussion is a waste of money
>
> how much did you pay for the discussion ?
> I hope you did not pay much, i dont think this discuss
Hi Vittorio
On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 01:07:26PM -0800, Vittorio Giovara wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 1:03 PM Michael Niedermayer
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 12:11:49AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > Hi all
> > >
> > > Should libpostproc be split out into a se
On Fri, 8 Nov 2024, 06:07 Vittorio Giovara,
wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 1:03 PM Michael Niedermayer >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 12:11:49AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > Hi all
> > >
> > > Should libpostproc be split out into a seperate source repository
On Thu, Nov 7, 2024 at 1:03 PM Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
> Hi all
>
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 12:11:49AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > Hi all
> >
> > Should libpostproc be split out into a seperate source repository ?
> >
> > Several people did over the years want libpostproc removed, an
Hi all
On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 12:11:49AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Should libpostproc be split out into a seperate source repository ?
>
> Several people did over the years want libpostproc removed, and such
> a task was part of the submitted and approved STF 2024 projects.
On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 12:11:49AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Should libpostproc be split out into a seperate source repository ?
>
> Several people did over the years want libpostproc removed, and such
> a task was part of the submitted and approved STF 2024 projects.
> But w
On 11/7/2024 7:52 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> It also did not achieve the intended result. libpostproc did continue to
> live in FFmpeg since that 2012 till today.
Interesting way you've defined 'intended result' for yourself here.
> The goal of this project is to have a seperate libpostproc
On 11/7/2024 8:04 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> This is slander
>
> libpostproc was simply deleted from libav.
>
> The messed up repository you created in 2012, was never maintained by anyone
>
> of course copying something in a messed up form and deleting support for it
> is not worth 5k eu
On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 02:48:13PM +, Derek Buitenhuis wrote:
> On 11/6/2024 11:11 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > 3. actually remove libpostproc from master repository (2025 future)
> > (send to SPI/STF/Invoice in future)
>
> I also did this exact work for Libav in 2012. It was very l
On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 02:46:49PM +, Derek Buitenhuis wrote:
> On 11/6/2024 11:11 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > 1. split libpostproc out so it builds and links fine (already done)
> > (send to SPI/STF/Invoice in future)
>
> I did this in 2012, the git repo is still there:
> http://
On 11/6/2024 11:11 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> 1. split libpostproc out so it builds and links fine (already done) (send
> to SPI/STF/Invoice in future)
I did this in 2012, the git repo is still there:
http://git.videolan.org/?p=libpostproc.git;a=summary
This work was very easy and not
On 11/6/2024 11:11 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> 3. actually remove libpostproc from master repository (2025 future) (send
> to SPI/STF/Invoice in future)
I also did this exact work for Libav in 2012. It was very little work. Not 5k.
- Derek
___
Hi all
Should libpostproc be split out into a seperate source repository ?
Several people did over the years want libpostproc removed, and such
a task was part of the submitted and approved STF 2024 projects.
But when i recently started posting related work, tomas questioned
if spliting libpostpr
52 matches
Mail list logo
