On 12/02/13 08:21, Ian Whyman wrote:
Guys,
Can we not just have a developer wide vote or something? This
instance clearly not going to resole itself.
It is a little bikeshed. Originally the virtual was ordered in a
way, then ordered in another and now we are discussing which one is
better
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 2:21 AM, Ian Whyman thev00...@gentoo.org wrote:
Can we not just have a developer wide vote or something? This instance
clearly not going to resole itself.
I don't think the average developer is really in a good position to
resolve this - it will just create a whole lot
On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 12:16:22 +0100
Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 12/02/13 08:21, Ian Whyman wrote:
Guys,
Can we not just have a developer wide vote or something? This
instance clearly not going to resole itself.
It is a little bikeshed. Originally the virtual was ordered
On 11/02/13 03:01, Alexis Ballier wrote:
Sorry, I was away this week end...
Not a problem, I should be reachable anytime today.
This is only because libav people do not care at all about what FFmpeg
defines, while FFmpeg seems to care more about its consumers and users
by trying to provide a
On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 12:25:36 +0100
Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 11/02/13 03:01, Alexis Ballier wrote:
Sorry, I was away this week end...
Not a problem, I should be reachable anytime today.
Will ping you.
This is only because libav people do not care at all about what
On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 17:22:16 +0100
Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
Alexis,
Alexis Ballier wrote:
All of this because ~10 people cannot work together, well, really,
thank you :)
Do you have experience from being in a similar situation? You are
being quite judgemental.
There are
Alexis - thanks a lot for the awesome response!
Alexis Ballier wrote:
'those who are right'
(Just a note that I am in no way invested in libav/ffmpeg, I merely
speak from experience with another fork.)
However, as I said, maybe with an incorrect tone, I do not think
libav ignoring what
Your whole email is derailing a bit from discussing the code at hand and
it is going deep down on the people, I'd rather not get there since it
gets totally unrelated the question at hand.
On 11/02/13 14:49, Alexis Ballier wrote:
All of this because ~10 people cannot work together, well, really,
Luca Barbato wrote:
May I point you that ~10 people were the majority of what was FFmpeg,
thus 10 people were enough to demote democratically the so called Leader
and that guy got the name from Fabrice as his personal decision?
There was probably a reason for Fabrice to do that, and majority
On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 22:04:43 +0100
Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote:
Your whole email is derailing a bit from discussing the code at hand
and it is going deep down on the people, I'd rather not get there
since it gets totally unrelated the question at hand.
I'm not sure if you read my
On 11/02/13 22:33, Peter Stuge wrote:
Luca Barbato wrote:
May I point you that ~10 people were the majority of what was FFmpeg,
thus 10 people were enough to demote democratically the so called Leader
and that guy got the name from Fabrice as his personal decision?
There was probably a
Luca Barbato wrote:
Users will never be satisfied. But I guess you agree that API
compatibility will certainly avoid extra problems for users.
It is not related to users,
I was trying to come back on topic. :)
is related to me being called as swine a traitor and having death
threats.
Guys,
Can we not just have a developer wide vote or something? This instance
clearly not going to resole itself.
Sometimes it seems that endless mailing list threads are the Gentoo way,
its a surprise we get anything done!
Ian
13 matches
Mail list logo
