Niklas Haas via ffmpeg-devel (HE12025-11-03): > 4. Developers should announce when they begin working on a bounty, and then > nobody else should be able to claim it until a reasonable amount of > time has passed. (Perhaps 12 weeks)
That seems rather reasonable, and in line with my position that people being paid to work on FFmpeg, i.e. who have incentives not completely aligned, should disclose it. You could add the requirement of a periodic status update. I think we should add: 5. When a bounty involves design decisions, these decisions must be discussed on the mailing list before investing time and effort in implementation. I do not want to repeat the fiasco of the channel layout API where the proposed API was developed entirely in private and ended up covering about a third of the uses cases, and when it was published it was a >100 patch series and too late to salvage it more than partially. For this to work, we need a way to commit ourselves to the outcome of the discussion. In particular the outcome of the first discussion “do we want that feature or not?”. If we discuss the design in July and come to as consensus, we do not want somebody who neglected the discussion at the time to be able to block the code in October because they do not like the design. They can object on technical matters, but as long as the code matches the design, you do not like the design, too bad, the time to say it was three months ago. For the code, committing ourselves to the decision means pushing the patches. But for the design, we do not have such a mechanism, and that is an issue. Regards, -- Nicolas George _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
