On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 12:59 PM Vittorio Giovara <vittorio.giovara@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 12:09 PM Paul B Mahol <onemda@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 9:09 AM Vittorio Giovara < vittorio.giovara@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 8:55 AM Paul B Mahol <onemda@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 8:53 AM Vittorio Giovara < vittorio.giovara@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 4, 2024 at 3:01 AM Cosmin Stejerean via ffmpeg-devel < ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:
> Reposting my question/comment here since Thilo hasn't had a chance to > respond, but shouldn't these kinds of requests go through the GA? If > anybody can do whatever they want with the ffmpeg name, then what's the > point of voting and following the established process?
Probably? I'm not actually sure what the process is for getting an FFmpeg booth at a conference. Is there a documented process somewhere for how this should be done? If not this might be a good opportunity to create one.
Agreed, do you have a draft you could share as a base of discussion? Once defined, we could have the GA vote on it
It might also make for a good topic of discussion at VDD. For how much drama there was about NAB on the list I was surprised there was zero discussion about it at FOSDEM.
There were probably more important topics to discuss and the lingering hope that the problematic points would have been handled better than by calling people trolls
Regarding the "or you" part, I wasn't involved in securing sponsorship for NAB or IBC. I did volunteer to help with NAB because I happen to live in Vegas and I enjoy spending time with other ffmpeg developers. I'm happy to help at NAB next year as well should it happen again.
Noted, it should have said "or anybody willing to host/help a booth"
I have no plans to attend IBC and no involvement with the FFmpeg booth at
IBC. I am merely trying to correct the perception that NAB was cost-problematic, since no money was paid by the project for NAB.
I don't think anybody is suggesting that booths are cost-problematic, but rather they are lacking in process (one shouldn't allowed use ffmpeg name "just because") and in scope (aka "the why" and what kind of results are expected by investing time in said booth)
Said by prominent LibAV developer.
reported to CC :)
CC is fully controlled by prominent LibAV developers.
Not only is this factually incorrect, it's also unrelated to the topic at hand. No worries, this infringement is being reported to the CC as well, but please try to make an effort at doing better at least. Thank you
Do not trust LibAV developers even when they are giving you gifts.
-- Vittorio _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".