[FFmpeg-devel] [FFmpeg-devel-irc] IRC log for 2010-04-26

[Alex Converse]

On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 01:00:17AM +0100, irc at mansr.com wrote:
> [...]
>> [19:13:36] <Bagder> in general Rockbox hackers want to contribute back and ideally we could end up with something that would be useful for both project without custom hacks
>> [19:13:51] <jai> that would be awesome
>> [19:16:25] <Bagder> the rockbox guys I've talked to have however not felt any dedication from ffmpeg to receive this work, ie the words are mostly just "send us the patch", and that's not enough to motivate these guys
>> [19:17:08] <Bagder> (I'm not personally involved in codec development)
>> [19:21:33] <jai> Bagder: that sucks, i'm sure something somewhere was misinterpreted
>> [19:21:40] <jai> Bagder: was this discussion on the ML?
>> [19:21:47] <Bagder> no, here
>> [19:21:48] <jai> Bagder: or purely on irc?
>> [19:22:00] <Bagder> and it was just brief
>> [19:22:04] <jai> Bagder: maybe we can get a discussion going on the ML
>> [19:22:08] <jai> Bagder: ah
>> [19:22:51] <BBB___> jai, isn't it like 3AM for you?
>> [19:22:55] <BBB___> as in, shouldn't you sleep?
>> [19:23:07] <jai> BBB___: more like 01:00 :)
>> [19:23:17] <BBB> well I was close :)
>> [19:23:20] <jai> BBB: caffeine ;)
>> [19:23:52] <Bagder> the other day I got emailed from a 3rd party project wanting better ffmpeg fixed-point support that reminded me about this
>> [19:26:07] <jai> Bagder: if someone (saratoga?) does have time, it would be great if we can run a merge proposal on the ML
>> [19:26:17] <jai> more visibility too :)
>> [19:29:13] <Bagder> yes, but it'd have the drawback that we'd have to get all the interested parties join your mailing list, and I bet that gets a lot of stuff that isn't related to this
>> [19:29:28] <Bagder> ie people will hesitate
>> [19:30:08] <Bagder> I would suggest a dedicated list for the effort
>> [19:32:55] * mt joins the discussion
>> [19:33:34] <Bagder> mt: what do you think is a good way forward on this?
>> [19:34:49] <BBB> for fixedpoint codecs?
>> [19:34:50] <mt> I like the suggestion of a dedicated ML
>> [19:35:16] <Bagder> BBB: yes for fixed-point, getting rockbox stuff back in but also for making it more future-proof
>> [19:35:22] <BBB> there's a problem
>> [19:35:24] <BBB> too many MLs
>> [19:35:29] <BBB> that's great for fragmentation
>> [19:35:38] <BBB> but it also has the side-effect that many main (or new) developers won't sign up
>> [19:35:39] <Bagder> yes, but the opposite is also a problem
>> [19:35:45] <BBB> so you'll lose broad developer support
>> [19:35:52] <BBB> i.e. I won't read it
>> [19:36:03] <BBB> for ffmpeg, you sort of have to cherry-pick emails from the list
>> [19:36:09] <BBB> like LKML
>> [19:36:15] <Bagder> yes, but that's major downside
>> [19:36:35] <Bagder> for most mortals at least
>> [19:36:36] <mt> I'll be working on wma pro soon, so if there's any interest in rb-ff collaboration, we'd better move quickly
>> [19:39:24] <BBB> Bagder: I'm just telling you what others might tell you as well
>> [19:39:30] <BBB> be aware of it while asking/hoping for a new ML
>> [19:39:32] <Bagder> I realize that
>> [19:39:39] <BBB> and if the main developers aren't on the new list
>> [19:39:42] <BBB> nothing will ever happen
>> [19:39:50] <Bagder> but you and the others need to understand the other side
>> [19:40:19] <Bagder> the rockbox guys won't just a list with 95% unrelated matters flying by at high speed...
>> [19:40:22] <BBB> people like Michael tend to be more important because without them, the project wouldn't move - at all
>
> if a new ML is created for this, ffmpeg-dev should be subscribed, that way
> all mails would also appear on ffmpeg-dev
> that waay everyone from ffmpeg sees them and you have your low volume list
> it just requires a bit of care when replying so replies dont just go to
> ffmpeg-dev
>

I thought we were trying to split things into smaller lists like -soc,
FATE, and -cvslog. I think an announcement to this list when a
fixedpoint list is created should be good enough.