James Almer: > On 8/24/2023 4:56 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Michael Niedermayer <mich...@niedermayer.cc> >> --- >> doc/developer.texi | 9 +++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/doc/developer.texi b/doc/developer.texi >> index 383120daaa..1c0091fc74 100644 >> --- a/doc/developer.texi >> +++ b/doc/developer.texi >> @@ -856,6 +856,15 @@ way to get everyone's patches reviewed sooner. >> Reviews must be constructive and when rejecting a patch the reviewer >> must explain >> their reasons and ideally suggest an alternative approach. >> +If a change is pushed without being sent to ffmpeg-devel, the >> developer >> +pushing it must annouce doing so on the ffmpeg-devel mailing list >> immedeatly. > > immediately. > > This chunk is ok, but... > >> +@example >> +forgot a semicolon in this patch, pushed a seperate fix >> +pushed my new autograd engine and stable diffusion filter. Didnt want to >> +go through the bikeshed if that belongs in FFmpeg, go to the GA if >> you want >> +it removed. Otherwise Just tell me what i should improve and ill look >> into it. >> +@end example > > ...this one isn't. It's very passive aggressive and not informative at all. > This instead should state that patches pushed without passing through > the ML have to either be trivial, to push fixes to mistakes in recently > pushed changes that did go through the ML, or for code you maintain. >
The maintainer exception has actually been removed in 6a3e174ad1921ba6aec473a2224c71610de3329b. - Andreas _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
