[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 1/2] lavfi: add FFFrameQueue API.

[Nicolas George]

Le duodi 2 nivôse, an CCXXV, James Almer a écrit :
> How's that addressing his concerns?

The answer I would have posted directly to his remarks would have been:

# > Is all this complexity really justified?
# 
# Yes, all this complexity is really justified, including the "leaky
# abstraction", and you would know it if you deigned look at the 45k patch
# that comes next and spare to the question one thousandth of the time I
# spent on it. Furthermore, making it even more complex by having it
# generic would be incredibly stupid. Unless you have precise and/or
# constructive remarks, the file stays as is.

I consider extremely rude from wm4 to have asked such naive, or rather
passive-aggressive ("Is all this complexity really justified?" actually
means "your crap is too complex") questions without taking the minimum
time to observe the use of the code in the next patch. Especially since
we had our differences in the past.

Ignoring wm4's comments that I consider rude instead of escalating on
the mailing list was specifically asked to me, and I did just that.

Now, maybe I was too curt in this mail:
https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2016-November/202768.html
Maybe; I do often do not try to rein my temper. Productive answers were
still possible. For example:

# I did not intend to be rude, and I do not consider I was. Please
# explain your problem.

Or even, to somebody neutral in private:

# Please ask this asshole to give a proper reply to my review.

That would have been the smart thing to do. Even just an insult would
have been something. But instead, wm4 elected to let the situation rot
for a month while the discussion continued. Why? Certainly because it is
easier to complain after the fact than to be constructive before.

Now, if wm4 has constructive remarks about the framequeue design or
implementation, they can be posted and discussed. Otherwise, there is no
reason to change anything. The code is complex and not entirely elegant,
but all this is necessary.

Regards,

-- 
  Nicolas George
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20161222/3d14c30d/attachment.sig>