Le perjantaina 25. elokuuta 2023, 17.58.40 EEST Anton Khirnov a écrit : > > And then sometimes an argument has been argued to death previously and > > there is really no point to rehash it again and again. If people cannot > > agree, they should refer to the TC, not brute force the review through > > overwhelming insistance. > > I think we just have different interpretations of the word > 'constructive' here. > I certainly agree that some patches are just not acceptable - I certainly > did not mean to imply that there must be a way forward for all patches.
I think that you do not agree with the generally accepted meaning of "constructive" in this context. By definition a review cannot be constructive, as in helpful or conducive of a way forward, if it argues that there are no ways forward. Maybe you meant "supported" or "corroborated". -- 雷米‧德尼-库尔蒙 http://www.remlab.net/ _______________________________________________ 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".
