On Sat, 23 Mar 2019, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Mar 23, 2019 at 11:03 AM Thilo Borgmann <thilo.borgm...@mail.de>
wrote:
Am 21.03.19 um 11:55 schrieb Michael Niedermayer:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 05:41:31PM -0400, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 4:15 PM Gyan <ffm...@gyani.pro> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 21-03-2019 01:32 AM, Marton Balint wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 20 Mar 2019, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 20 Mar 2019, at 20:52, Marton Balint wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 20 Mar 2019, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, 20 Mar 2019, at 19:34, Marton Balint wrote:
>>>>>>>> As I described in similar threads before, whether or not the
>>>>>> project want >> closed source support for NDI is a subjective issue,
>>>>>> please start a vote >> about the removal of libndi if you want to
>>>>>> seek this through.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The removal of libndi is actually done and committed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is just sad an unfair.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sad, maybe.
>>>>> Unfair, I disagree. If NDI wants to be in, they know what to do.
>>>>
>>>> It is unfair towards the people who expressied disapproval, yet this
>>>> change was committed without neither vote nor consensus.
>>>
>>> +1. This was a political decision, not a technical one. A formal(-ish)
>>> survey should have happened on the ML.
>>>
>>
>> I agree we need a formal vote on this. I would like to set a wider
project
>> policy w.r.t. closed-source software integration, this is just one
instance
>> of a more general issue.
> I think there should have been a vote before pushing a commit as there
where
> FFmpeg developers objecting to it.
> Ignoring people causes nothing good. Had there been a vote people would
be
> alot less upset about it as everyones oppinion would be counted equally
>
> It makes me unhappy that one FFmpeg developer apparently decided to leave
> the project already because of this.
> I think we should fix this, make a proper policy, with a proper vote
> and then hopefully noone feels the need to leave.
+1
>>
>> Who wants to organize it?
>
> Thilo organized the last vote, maybe he wants to do it ?
> but if noone else wants to do it i can do one too if people want and
> there is consensus who can vote
> If i search for "open source vote free" on google it points to
> vote.heliosvoting.org as first hit
> this seems rather basic but for simple yes/no questions it could work
> maybe someone has a better suggestion we could use for more complex
future
> cases that is multiple choice votes in teh future (schulze STV / CPO-STV
> for multiwinner or ScottishSTV (used by SPI), schulze method (used by
debian)
> for one winner of N choices would be nice to have)
Including for simple yes/no votes we can use the same LimeSurvey host we
got provided from KDE for the survey. Also for anonymous votes.
I think what we have to figure out is whether we want to ask:
- do we want to keep (or remove) NDI?
I think this is definitely needed to justify the recent events.
or
- do we want to keep any components requiring linking with non-system,
closed-source software? (this might or might not include blackmagic)
or some other variant that also includes system software like nvidia stuff?
Or ask a simple yes/no for each component separately? (Although that
wouldn't set a more general policy.)
I prefer votes on a case by case basis, because it is hard to categorize
closed source components. (ok, maybe not NDI, but for
M264/Nvidia/Blackmagic it is definitely not trivial).
Regards,
Marton
_______________________________________________
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".
