[FFmpeg-devel] Reintroducing FFmpeg to Debian
nfxjfg at googlemail.com
Sat Aug 16 17:44:33 CEST 2014
On Sat, 16 Aug 2014 23:29:56 +0800
Thomas Goirand <zigo at debian.org> wrote:
> On 08/15/2014 11:53 PM, The Wanderer wrote:
> > It's also something the Linux kernel is still doing, with apparent
> > success.
> Yes, the Linux kernel is a successful project. Does this mean using a
> list for reviewing patches is a good thing? No! The workflow with a list
> is simply horrible. Using git-review and gerrit is so much better.
> > I for one consider it to be a much more public, transparent, and
> > discoverable way to let proposed patches and the review of same be open
> > to public view, compared to the way various other projects seem to do
> > it.
> > Making sure everything passes through the mailing list, and most if not
> > all substantive discussion happens on the mailing list, is a lot better
> > than having some discussion on the mailing lists and some on a bug
> > tracker and some on IRC and some via private mail and so on. (The most
> > ridiculously extreme example of this fragmentation that I know of is
> > probably the Mozilla project.)
> This reasoning may work when you have only a small amount of information
> to read. When you are overwhelmed with it, having different places to do
> different things is a much better approach. Sending patches to a list
> simply doesn't scale.
> Also, with a list, it's not convenient at all to point out a line in a
> patch in a mailing list. You must extract the relevant lines, cut/past
> them, and comment them. Instead, double clicking on the line of the
> patch which is displayed on a web interface is much more convenient.
What? Most patches are posted inline (with git-send-email).
> > There's nothing wrong with having discussion in those various areas, of
> > course; it's probably inevitable, and it's even a good thing. It's just
> > that it's a lot harder for someone not intimately involved with the
> > project to follow discussion if it happens in such a variety of places,
> > and there's value to be found in making sure that everything passes
> > through one central (discussion-enabled) point before landing.
> Lists are good tools for discussing where a project should go, release
> goals, and so on. They aren't good tools to do patch reviews. I've used
> both, and I'm convinced of that.
What we need is solving the FFmpeg/Libav split, not "well-meant"
suggestions by outsiders how to change our development model.
> Thomas Goirand (zigo)
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
More information about the ffmpeg-devel