[Ffmpeg-devel] Matroska Patch

[Steve Lhomme]

Rich Felker wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 03:15:00PM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 02:16:01PM +0100, Steve Lhomme wrote:
>> [...]
>>>>> Most of the fixes found in this patch are fixes for *all* existing 
>>>>> Matroska files. I don't think I have to send any. Just open one in 
>>>>> FFMPEG and you'll see. I described all the fixes included in this patch. 
>>>>> So you have #1, #2, #3, #4.
>>>> well,  you dont have to do anything, just if you want a bug fixed or
>>>> patch accepted then you will have to follow the same rules as everyone else
>>>> now if you had a constructive comment about the rules or suggestions
>>>> for their improvement that would be fine too, but you just waste our time
>>> I have nothing against the rules. Just the way code is turned down. Like 
>>> the MPEG2 fix I sent that you know better than me how to fix it, but you 
>>> didn't. 
>> well, there seems to be a missunderstanding here if someone sends a buggy/
>> wrong/unaceptable bugfix it wont be applied but this doesnt mean anyone from
>> the team is obliged to spend their time fixing _YOUR_ bug. your view is very
>> arrogant
> 
> And for those who flamed me for flaming Steve (in case it wasn't
> obvious) this is exactly why I did it. I am allergic to
> self-proclaimed contributors who have little to contribute except
> telling all the existing developers that what they're doing is wrong
> and expecting everyone to bow down to them and make the changes they
> want to work around their buggy code/files/compilers/whatever without
> any regard for how it affects everyone else.


Chicken & egg. Infinite loop.

And the story started more than a few weeks ago.

Steve