From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (ffbox0-bg.ffmpeg.org [79.124.17.100]) by master.gitmailbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8A59480C6 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 2023 19:15:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.1.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19E2D68CBA6; Thu, 9 Nov 2023 21:15:43 +0200 (EET) Received: from mail0.khirnov.net (red.khirnov.net [176.97.15.12]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E3EE68C9F2 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 2023 21:15:36 +0200 (EET) Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mail0.khirnov.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 164CB2404B1 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 2023 20:15:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail0.khirnov.net ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mail0.khirnov.net [IPv6:::1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP id znwUVgbp2qw9 for ; Thu, 9 Nov 2023 20:15:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from lain.khirnov.net (lain.khirnov.net [IPv6:2001:67c:1138:4306::3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "lain.khirnov.net", Issuer "smtp.khirnov.net SMTP CA" (verified OK)) by mail0.khirnov.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6280E24043D for ; Thu, 9 Nov 2023 20:15:33 +0100 (CET) Received: by lain.khirnov.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 37E291601B9; Thu, 9 Nov 2023 20:15:33 +0100 (CET) From: Anton Khirnov To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches In-Reply-To: <20231109185016.GE3543730@pb2> References: <169917627924.11195.16676364527851497705@lain.khirnov.net> <169952305288.11195.8661027913609939054@lain.khirnov.net> <20231109115525.GV3543730@pb2> <169953247356.11195.1507797262881301434@lain.khirnov.net> <20231109162112.GX3543730@pb2> <169954957667.11195.13342031312073463508@lain.khirnov.net> <20231109173923.GA3543730@pb2> <169955354463.11195.2914048463799781240@lain.khirnov.net> <20231109185016.GE3543730@pb2> Mail-Followup-To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2023 20:15:33 +0100 Message-ID: <169955733320.11195.5804152642478042700@lain.khirnov.net> User-Agent: alot/0.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [ANNOUNCE] upcoming vote: extra members for GA X-BeenThere: ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: FFmpeg development discussions and patches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org Sender: "ffmpeg-devel" Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Post: Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-11-09 19:50:16) > > > > > these are lists with roughly 50 entries, now we _know_ 2 people differ > > > > We don't. You only mention one, whom I adress above. Who is the second? > > Alexander Strasser It seems clear that none of the three extra GA members were on the list used now. In my opinion that is correct, as their voting rights expired a year ago. > > > > > but there where 3 on the extra voters list so really 4 differ almost certainly > > > > I do not understand this math. > > There where 3 extra developer voted onto the GA and there is zane. > that makes 4 > there is also Gautam Ramakrishnan on the posted list who simply did not > have 20 commits at the time of the votes in 2020 > thats 5. > > You cannot explain this away. > Also Thilo mentioned that the number of voters was 49 without the 3 extra members > in the results while the list jb posted had 51 > > These things really dont match no matter how you turn it > > And again thats why iam asking questions. The problem is, there is nothing meaningful you can do with the answers. Yes, mistakes were made in 2020. The rules were not defined clearly enough. The process for generating the list was not formalized. The lists themselves were not preserved unambiguously, apparently. Now all that is being rectified. The rules have been clarified. The list of voters has been published for the last vote, and the intent is to publish it for all future votes. I intend to update the script after the next vote, so that the extra GA members are in there and it generates the actually correct result. > > We don't need to "understand what happened", > > We do need to understand what happened. The whole project depends on the decissions > of teh GA. This is not a joke, this is not something where we can be not sure > who was on the voter list But we are sure who was on the list, it was published. Not to mention you have root access to the server, you can just look at the email logs if you have any doubts. So what is the point of all this? Besides creating a situation where voting is too hard, so we never do it, as was the case for the past 2 years. -- Anton Khirnov _______________________________________________ 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".