* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg Community Committee – Updates & Next Steps
2025-02-26 1:51 ` Michael Niedermayer
@ 2025-02-26 14:22 ` Vittorio Giovara
2025-02-26 22:33 ` Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel
2025-02-26 23:11 ` Jean-Baptiste Kempf
2025-02-26 23:51 ` James Almer
2 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Vittorio Giovara @ 2025-02-26 14:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 2:51 AM Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>
wrote:
> Hi Marth64
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 05:04:00PM -0600, Marth64 wrote:
> > Dear FFmpeg Community,
> >
> > We’d like to share an update on the work of the Community Committee
> > (CC). Starting this week, we will hold a weekly internal panel to
> > discuss community matters and ensure more structured issue resolution.
> >
> > One of our key goals is to address some of the lingering discussions
> > from 2024 while laying a strong foundation for the future. We
> > recognize that progress will be gradual, but we are committed to
> > working as a team and presenting unified messaging to improve
> > communication and transparency. We expect to deliver communications
> > soon on some issues.
> >
> > We look forward to continuing to serve the FFmpeg community and
> > fostering a collaborative and productive environment. Thank you for
> > your ongoing support and engagement.
>
Thank you for your work trying to steward the community Marth.
> >
> > On behalf of the CC,
>
> There are 3+ parts here
>
> 1. I agree we need discussions, transparency and maybe IRC or some other
> audio/video form of commuication can be tried. Such discussion should be
> public and open. And they must include admins and main authors.
>
No, they shouldn't, otherwise the CC will be influenced by the project
leader *again* and prevented from doing anything actionable *again*.
> 2. The CC is overstepping its authority.
>
No, respectfully, you are.
> 3. There is a huge growing backlog of increasing development issues
> id like to work on without having to fight and argue over governance
> Id like to backport security fixes, make new releases.
>
Then stop talking about governance, let the current system in place do its
job :)
> About "internal panel", There should not be a "internal panel" dominated
> by videolan developers discussing FFmpeg.
It never was or has been, but I agree it should be independent, including
from current FFmpeg leadership.
> If there is such a panel, it
> should be the main authors, the people who did spend a significant time
> of their life working on FFmpeg. (and you should be included as you seem
> good at this, and i should be in it because iam one of the main authors
> amongth other things)
>
While people who spent a significant time of their life working on FFmpeg
may be great developers, their skillset might not be matching the one
needed to handle a community.
Cmon we've been over these points, let's not rehash the same drama over and
over, and let the volunteers of the CC do their job.
--
Vittorio
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg Community Committee – Updates & Next Steps
2025-02-26 14:22 ` Vittorio Giovara
@ 2025-02-26 22:33 ` Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel @ 2025-02-26 22:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches; +Cc: Kieran Kunhya
> While people who spent a significant time of their life working on FFmpeg
> may be great developers, their skillset might not be matching the one
> needed to handle a community.
>
> Cmon we've been over these points, let's not rehash the same drama over and
> over, and let the volunteers of the CC do their job.
Hi Vittorio,
A quick reminder that questioning the unelected people who run our
infrastructure in a wholly secretive fashion is unacceptable but
questioning the elected CC is perfectly fine. I thought you knew the
rules here by now.
Regards,
Kieran Kunhya
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg Community Committee – Updates & Next Steps
2025-02-26 1:51 ` Michael Niedermayer
2025-02-26 14:22 ` Vittorio Giovara
@ 2025-02-26 23:11 ` Jean-Baptiste Kempf
2025-02-26 23:51 ` James Almer
2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jean-Baptiste Kempf @ 2025-02-26 23:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ffmpeg-devel
On Wed, 26 Feb 2025, at 02:51, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> 1. I agree we need discussions, transparency and maybe IRC or some other
> audio/video form of commuication can be tried. Such discussion should be
> public and open. And they must include admins and main authors.
Great, the mailing list is here for that. It is public and open.
> 2. The CC is overstepping its authority.
Literally, the email just says that the CC is now meeting regularly; what authority can it be overstepping?
People speaking together and meeting is now forbidden?
> 3. About "internal panel", There should not be a "internal panel" dominated
CC was elected by GA. GA is composed of most of the active developers. This is not a random internal panel.
And people active in a project are allowed to talk to each other. How can you deny people the right to talk to each other?
--
Jean-Baptiste Kempf
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg Community Committee – Updates & Next Steps
2025-02-26 1:51 ` Michael Niedermayer
2025-02-26 14:22 ` Vittorio Giovara
2025-02-26 23:11 ` Jean-Baptiste Kempf
@ 2025-02-26 23:51 ` James Almer
2 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: James Almer @ 2025-02-26 23:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ffmpeg-devel
[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2989 bytes --]
On 2/25/2025 10:51 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> Hi Marth64
>
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 05:04:00PM -0600, Marth64 wrote:
>> Dear FFmpeg Community,
>>
>> We’d like to share an update on the work of the Community Committee
>> (CC). Starting this week, we will hold a weekly internal panel to
>> discuss community matters and ensure more structured issue resolution.
>>
>> One of our key goals is to address some of the lingering discussions
>> from 2024 while laying a strong foundation for the future. We
>> recognize that progress will be gradual, but we are committed to
>> working as a team and presenting unified messaging to improve
>> communication and transparency. We expect to deliver communications
>> soon on some issues.
>>
>> We look forward to continuing to serve the FFmpeg community and
>> fostering a collaborative and productive environment. Thank you for
>> your ongoing support and engagement.
>>
>> On behalf of the CC,
>
> There are 3+ parts here
>
> 1. I agree we need discussions, transparency and maybe IRC or some other
> audio/video form of commuication can be tried. Such discussion should be
> public and open. And they must include admins and main authors.
>
> 2. The CC is overstepping its authority.
How? What part of the above makes you think that? He only stated they
are now discussing and going through the 2024 stuff.
>
> 3. There is a huge growing backlog of increasing development issues
Yes, he said as much.
> id like to work on without having to fight and argue over governance
> Id like to backport security fixes, make new releases.
>
> About "internal panel", There should not be a "internal panel" dominated
> by videolan developers discussing FFmpeg. If there is such a panel, it
> should be the main authors, the people who did spend a significant time
> of their life working on FFmpeg. (and you should be included as you seem
> good at this, and i should be in it because iam one of the main authors
> amongth other things)
If you wanted to be part of the CC and its deliberations, why didn't you
volunteer for it during last vote? You were in the previous CC, and you
would have surely been among the five voted if so.
For what is worth, you, even if not part of the CC but as the one that
made several accusations (and the target of another bunch), could
request to be part of the deliberations regarding those specific issues.
Is this codified anywhere? If not, it could be drafted and a vote be
held for such addition.
>
> Thank you
>
> PS: this is just my initial thought/reply and i may have a better idea
> after sleeping over this
>
> [...]
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
> https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
>
> To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
> ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
[-- Attachment #1.2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 251 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread