On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 12:32 PM, compn <te...@mi.rr.com> wrote: > On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 19:20:57 +0200 > Hendrik Leppkes <h.lepp...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 7:00 PM, wm4 <nfx...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> > On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 12:53:58 -0400 >> > Ganesh Ajjanagadde <gajja...@mit.edu> wrote: >> > >> >> On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 12:37 PM, wm4 <nfx...@googlemail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> > On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 12:12:44 -0400 >> >> > Ganesh Ajjanagadde <gajja...@mit.edu> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 12:06 PM, wm4 <nfx...@googlemail.com> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> > On Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:59:44 -0400 >> >> >> > Ganesh Ajjanagadde <gajja...@mit.edu> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde >> >> >> >> <gajja...@mit.edu> wrote: >> >> >> >> > On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 11:08 AM, wm4 >> >> >> >> > <nfx...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On 18.09.2015 15:09, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote: >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 8:26 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde >> >> >> >> >>> <gajjanaga...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >> >>>> Fixes -Wunused-function from >> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >> >>>> http://fate.ffmpeg.org/report.cgi?time=20150820031140&slot=arm64-darwin-clang-apple-5.1 >> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >> >>>> Signed-off-by: Ganesh Ajjanagadde >> >> >> >> >>>> <gajjanaga...@gmail.com> --- >> >> >> >> >>>> libavformat/hls.c | 13 ------------- >> >> >> >> >>>> 1 file changed, 13 deletions(-) >> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >> >>>> diff --git a/libavformat/hls.c b/libavformat/hls.c >> >> >> >> >>>> index c16c770..2ea3a22 100644 >> >> >> >> >>>> --- a/libavformat/hls.c >> >> >> >> >>>> +++ b/libavformat/hls.c >> >> >> >> >>>> @@ -495,19 +495,6 @@ static int >> >> >> >> >>>> ensure_playlist(HLSContext *c, struct playlist **pls, >> >> >> >> >>>> const char *url return 0; >> >> >> >> >>>> } >> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >> >>>> -static int open_in(HLSContext *c, AVIOContext **in, >> >> >> >> >>>> const char *url) -{ >> >> >> >> >>>> - AVDictionary *tmp = NULL; >> >> >> >> >>>> - int ret; >> >> >> >> >>>> - >> >> >> >> >>>> - av_dict_copy(&tmp, c->avio_opts, 0); >> >> >> >> >>>> - >> >> >> >> >>>> - ret = avio_open2(in, url, AVIO_FLAG_READ, >> >> >> >> >>>> c->interrupt_callback, &tmp); >> >> >> >> >>>> - >> >> >> >> >>>> - av_dict_free(&tmp); >> >> >> >> >>>> - return ret; >> >> >> >> >>>> -} >> >> >> >> >>>> - >> >> >> >> >>>> static int url_connect(struct playlist *pls, >> >> >> >> >>>> AVDictionary *opts, AVDictionary *opts2) >> >> >> >> >>>> { >> >> >> >> >>>> AVDictionary *tmp = NULL; >> >> >> >> >>>> -- >> >> >> >> >>>> 2.5.2 >> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >>> ping; wm4 basically did not like my old patch: see >> >> >> >> >>> https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2015-August/177769.html >> >> >> >> >>> for his thoughts and my response. Here, I delete as >> >> >> >> >>> opposed to comment out the lines. I personally do not >> >> >> >> >>> care about deleting vs commenting out; but one of the >> >> >> >> >>> two should be used. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> If you think the inactive code is worth keeping, put it >> >> >> >> >> into a git branch or tag the commit removing the code.t >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > I do not have write access, so I will leave it up to you >> >> >> >> > (or anyone else pushing) to either apply the old patch or >> >> >> >> > this one (and possibly tag it if desired). >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> See above for two possiblities on resolving this: either >> >> >> >> this patch (optionally tagging it), or simply commenting out >> >> >> >> the function (see above for link to old patch). >> >> >> >> Ping. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Just get rid of this. I had to deal with the HLS code lately, >> >> >> > and it was utterly confusing that there was this unused >> >> >> > function. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Also, this function is so trivial, that anyone really needing >> >> >> > it could rewrite it in under a minute, and it'd probably be >> >> >> > an improvement too. Even discussing keeping this is a waste >> >> >> > of energy. >> >> >> >> >> >> Please push this patch then; you have write access and I don't. >> >> > >> >> > Send your SSH key to Michael Niedermayer. I'll apply this patch >> >> > in a moment. >> >> >> >> Michael offered write access a month back, to which I replied >> >> saying that I do not trust myself with it at the moment and would >> >> like to wait a year. I also said that I would reconsider if it is >> >> leading to wasted maintainer time. Our back and forth here >> >> suggests that there is some wastage. >> >> >> >> If no one objects to me getting write access, I will send it to >> >> Michael. Please note that the intention right now is not for any >> >> "maintainership" duties, but simply to ease the application of >> >> reviewed patches. >> > >> > Yes, it's much better for everyone if you just push your own >> > patches, after they have been OK'ed. >> >> Personally I find giving new people push access after only 3 months of >> activity slightly premature. > > so if they have been around for 6 months its better? >
Maybe, maybe not. There is no written rule for the time. I just feel like someone with push access should gather a bit of seniority in the project first, just to get a proper grasp of how it runs and what all the "unwritten rules" you refer to actually are. - Hendrik _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel