[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH]download: Fix the release link
michael at niedermayer.cc
Fri Apr 12 16:49:21 EEST 2019
On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 02:04:21PM -0400, Lou Logan wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2019, at 9:39 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > and i would suggest we consider setting up some bug bounties for these
> > 151 ? regressions or a subset of them. This may help to draw more
> > interrest towards them ...
> Getting off-topic here, but I think some of the donated funds should be used for bounties. Otherwise, as far as I know, it seems to be mostly used for conference travel/lodging reimbursement.
> The downside is when money is involved things can get complicated. Who decides which bugs/feature requests get a bounty? How do we determine how much each bounty is worth? Can the same person who is involved a bounty decision also claim the same bounty?
I would suggest a simple rule that requires no decission maker and that
self adjusts the value.
If we assume that simple, nonsense or duplicate tickets will get fixed/closed
quickly then it would be reasonable to assume that the age of a ticket is
proportional to its difficulty.
Also waiting does not work in this form to drive price up as waiting includes
the risk that someone else will fix it.
A simple dumb rule could be that we pay X cent per day of age of a ticket
from when it was opened and had a reproducable testcase (not newly created) to
when it is closed. Payment would be to the author of the change fixing it (if
teh author wants to be paid)
Also there can still be a safe guard in here for example all payment could
require to be approved individually the public ML. So if someone found a way
to game the system people could still object to the payment.
> VideoLAN offers bounties (including some on libavcodec), but I don't know the details of how it is implemented. Out of pure efficiency (laziness) maybe we can copy what they do.
I would suggest not to require prior "registration" but rather
whoever fixed it has the right to request payment within some
reasonable time like 3 months after the fix is pushed
With bugs its not always clear how complex a fix is. So requireing
"contact first" could lead to some annoying grab-ungrab cycles on bugs
and to people fixing a bug and then not getting the payment because they
missed the contacting first thing.
I think the risk for 2 people fixing the same bug at the same time
(which then also needs to have been open since a long time to matter)
feels like it would be a rare occurance
The disadvantage here is of course that with a tiny bounty from the first day
and no pre-registration some peole will be eligible for payment of a few
cent which could be unpractical/annoying
maybe a minimum of 100 euro per payout or so could fix this
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
Republics decline into democracies and democracies degenerate into
despotisms. -- Aristotle
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the ffmpeg-devel