On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 06:30:50PM +0100, Kieran Kunhya wrote:
> > Speaking of incorrect attribution, you may be interested in looking for
> >
> > Author: multiple authors
> >
> > in the FFmpeg Git history.
>
> You can write on ffmpeg-devel and object like Ronald did on libav-devel.
I would ne
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 06:30:50PM +0100, Kieran Kunhya wrote:
>
> And all of this just because you didn't like the code spacing.
Seriously? You couldn't just have bitten your tongue and deleted this
line before sending?
I'm disappointed in you.
Diego
__
On 29 Aug, Ronald S. Bultje wrote :
> Remember JBs pains to get pieces of VideoLan relicensed under LGPL? Let's
> prevent that, it's easy.
Well, to be honest, the habitude of FFmpeg of merging code from
anonymous persons or multiple persons under various license is extremely
bad on this, and worse
On 29 Aug, Timothy Gu wrote :
> There are no insults, but there are reviews from FFmpeg developers
> that are ignored here, which are even worse IMO.
reviews ignored is worse than insults???
Seriously?
--
Jean-Baptiste Kempf
http://www.jbkempf.com/ - +33 672 704 734
Sent from my Electronic Devi
On 30/08/14 01:18, Derek Buitenhuis wrote:
> On 8/30/2014 12:16 AM, Luca Barbato wrote:
>> In case I'm wrong and importing code against the will of the first
>> originator is against some law I'll see how to fix this issue, possibly
>> amicably.
>
> The problem was not importing against someone's
On 8/30/2014 12:16 AM, Luca Barbato wrote:
> In case I'm wrong and importing code against the will of the first
> originator is against some law I'll see how to fix this issue, possibly
> amicably.
The problem was not importing against someone's will, but squashing in changes
they did not write, u
On 29/08/14 18:40, Kieran Kunhya wrote:
>> The remark you mention there was not a review, but rather a complaint that
>> the submitted patch was not easy enough to diff against the FFmpeg version.
>> Cleanup by other contributors from libav was squashed in order to have a
>> clean version in the hi
Am 29.08.2014 21:57 schrieb "Ronald S. Bultje" :
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
>
> >
> > Am 29.08.2014 20:03 schrieb "Ronald S. Bultje" :
> > > On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 1:30 PM, Kieran Kunhya wrote:
> > > > "You're throwing a blob at me without individual author's
>
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
>
> Am 29.08.2014 20:03 schrieb "Ronald S. Bultje" :
> > On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 1:30 PM, Kieran Kunhya wrote:
> > > "You're throwing a blob at me without individual author's
> > > contribution, I don't think that's
> > > appropriate."
>
Am 29.08.2014 20:03 schrieb "Ronald S. Bultje" :
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 1:30 PM, Kieran Kunhya wrote:
> > "You're throwing a blob at me without individual author's
> > contribution, I don't think that's
> > appropriate."
> >
> > You've decided to selectively ignore the second part of the
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 1:30 PM, Kieran Kunhya wrote:
> "You're throwing a blob at me without individual author's
> contribution, I don't think that's
> appropriate."
>
> You've decided to selectively ignore the second part of the message.
> As I read that it says he is not happy with those
"You're throwing a blob at me without individual author's
contribution, I don't think that's
appropriate."
You've decided to selectively ignore the second part of the message.
As I read that it says he is not happy with those changes being
attributed to him.
> Speaking of incorrect attribution, y
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 06:48:14PM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 05:40:29PM +0100, Kieran Kunhya wrote:
> > > The remark you mention there was not a review, but rather a complaint that
> > > the submitted patch was not easy enough to diff against the FFmpeg
> > > version.
>
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 09:20:59AM -0700, Timothy Gu wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 05:26:32PM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> >> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 08:19:55AM -0700, Timothy Gu wrote:
> >> >
> >> > http://lists.libav.org/pipermail/lib
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 05:40:29PM +0100, Kieran Kunhya wrote:
> > The remark you mention there was not a review, but rather a complaint that
> > the submitted patch was not easy enough to diff against the FFmpeg version.
> > Cleanup by other contributors from libav was squashed in order to have a
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Timothy Gu wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Vittorio Giovara
> wrote:
>>
>> Timothy, if throwing out of context links at each other is your
>> definition of sane communication, maybe it's better to end this
>> straight away.
>
> If you think pointing out
> The remark you mention there was not a review, but rather a complaint that
> the submitted patch was not easy enough to diff against the FFmpeg version.
> Cleanup by other contributors from libav was squashed in order to have a
> clean version in the history and for review on the ml. I and other
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Vittorio Giovara
wrote:
>
> Timothy, if throwing out of context links at each other is your
> definition of sane communication, maybe it's better to end this
> straight away.
If you think pointing out some points of improvement is not sane
communication I can and
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 05:26:32PM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 08:19:55AM -0700, Timothy Gu wrote:
>> >
>> > http://lists.libav.org/pipermail/libav-devel/2014-August/062391.html:
>> > the first more important point
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 05:26:32PM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 08:19:55AM -0700, Timothy Gu wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 7:43 AM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 11:33:19AM +0200, wm4 wrote:
> > >> On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 01:00:45 +0200
> > >> Diego B
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Timothy Gu wrote:
> There are no insults, but there are reviews from FFmpeg developers
> that are ignored here, which are even worse IMO.
>
> Latest cases I have spotted:
>
> http://lists.libav.org/pipermail/libav-devel/2014-August/062391.html:
> the first more im
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 08:19:55AM -0700, Timothy Gu wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 7:43 AM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 11:33:19AM +0200, wm4 wrote:
> >> On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 01:00:45 +0200
> >> Diego Biurrun wrote:
> >> > On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 12:28:56AM +0200, Clément B
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 7:43 AM, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 11:33:19AM +0200, wm4 wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 01:00:45 +0200
>> Diego Biurrun wrote:
>> > On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 12:28:56AM +0200, Clément Bœsch wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Kieran suggested tonight on #ffmpeg-devel to
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 11:33:19AM +0200, wm4 wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 01:00:45 +0200
> Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 12:28:56AM +0200, Clément Bœsch wrote:
> > >
> > > Kieran suggested tonight on #ffmpeg-devel to have a common mailing-list
> > > between the two projects to
On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 01:00:45 +0200
Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 12:28:56AM +0200, Clément Bœsch wrote:
> >
> > Kieran suggested tonight on #ffmpeg-devel to have a common mailing-list
> > between the two projects to start communicating again in sane terms.
> >
> > The propositi
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 01:00:45AM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 12:28:56AM +0200, Clément Bœsch wrote:
> >
> > Kieran suggested tonight on #ffmpeg-devel to have a common mailing-list
> > between the two projects to start communicating again in sane terms.
> >
> > The prop
On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 12:28:56AM +0200, Clément Bœsch wrote:
>
> Kieran suggested tonight on #ffmpeg-devel to have a common mailing-list
> between the two projects to start communicating again in sane terms.
>
> The proposition would be a mailing-list where the 2 projects would send
> the patch
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 06:58:57PM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
[...]
> Second, how do you propose this arrangement will actually function? As you
> probably know, I see many of the API additions done in your project as ugly
> hacks, and would be strongly opposed to having them in our tree in their
On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 00:28:56 +0200, =?utf-8?B?Q2zDqW1lbnQgQsWTc2No?=
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Kieran suggested tonight on #ffmpeg-devel to have a common mailing-list
> between the two projects to start communicating again in sane terms.
>
> The proposition would be a mailing-list where the 2 projects
Hi,
Kieran suggested tonight on #ffmpeg-devel to have a common mailing-list
between the two projects to start communicating again in sane terms.
The proposition would be a mailing-list where the 2 projects would send
the patches that will make API evolutions. So the projects can continue to
drop
30 matches
Mail list logo
