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 05EC448F92 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 16:50:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.1.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B1D868C82F; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 18:50:26 +0200 (EET) Received: from mail0.khirnov.net (red.khirnov.net [176.97.15.12]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3771C68D1C9 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 18:50:20 +0200 (EET) Authentication-Results: mail0.khirnov.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=khirnov.net header.i=@khirnov.net header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mail header.b=a+J7hJhH; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mail0.khirnov.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E375D24048D for ; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 17:50:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail0.khirnov.net ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mail0.khirnov.net [IPv6:::1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP id hGMn7mMDXQzv for ; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 17:50:19 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=khirnov.net; s=mail; t=1709311819; bh=NeITYAzdDJsmw04ygRSej4Cd0UoOLzShfaQbnbXJY/o=; h=Subject:From:To:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=a+J7hJhHwXzyB230QANOmoxa8eNVnge9nxanpMivHQ9uTAlwt5hh7oUfenwsv0H02 FqoPG2Zt/2SPRGqpZk2hKAXtHjLouohMyHdHWFwbPJHFaPmKzG4HFkHS+DB1birUjV kAdcMR6d7VJA9Xt0qrFRPuDn01tBZ+OatEOB2X1VfZsHYZYFwjuUQ2ADfG56GlrhA2 uDBk8UgyBLHVc01JZRZznpDQwtJx2LmZAhtPN1d44mDzXWJ9QttqWZEpNpHSwocT7b upkQDUY7s2bO65Pt0UFnmYYqd3uhowjG+QLbVxs5b6DWU+4yTsYKUvCsFcj2KmOXym XMZnPxLSGIilA== 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 5E41F240177 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 17:50:19 +0100 (CET) Received: by lain.khirnov.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 3CC6F1601B9; Fri, 1 Mar 2024 17:50:19 +0100 (CET) From: Anton Khirnov To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches In-Reply-To: <20240227165530.GX6420@pb2> References: <170841737762.27417.14992162535824834057@lain.khirnov.net> <170841903359.27417.409422117260058401@lain.khirnov.net> <20240220215033.GB93170@haasn.xyz> <170863646063.27417.10776746571038243119@lain.khirnov.net> <20240223232708.GJ6420@pb2> <170896637695.29002.14771451562422231612@lain.khirnov.net> <20240226224720.GW6420@pb2> <170901843037.29002.2331338975539682545@lain.khirnov.net> <20240227165530.GX6420@pb2> Mail-Followup-To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2024 17:50:19 +0100 Message-ID: <170931181921.29002.2411987631126308768@lain.khirnov.net> User-Agent: alot/0.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] clarifying the TC conflict of interest rule 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 (2024-02-27 17:55:30) > On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 08:20:30AM +0100, Anton Khirnov wrote: > > Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2024-02-26 23:47:20) > > > > > > Look at the 3 patches i just posted. > > > I suspect we can move alot closer to what you suggest without a vote but > > > simply by consensus > > > > Your patches use a 'must' wording, > > Then please reply to them and explain your point, why the wording > is bad, what alternative wording you suggest and why thats better. > Its a patch, we discuss patches here on ffmpeg-devel Hijacking other people's patches without their consent is what we do NOT do though. > > while multiple people would prefer a > > 'should'. > > > > > But even more importantly, you are leaving the disputed line as is, so > > it's not solving the problem at all. > > The questions about > 1. allowing votes under conflict of interrest > 2. if votes must be in the best interrest of the project > 3. if one can vote on their own disagreements > ... > > are 3+ seperate things. > > You are trying to pack good changes with a change that allows one to > vote on ones own disagreements. And you are trying to pass your personal opinions on which changes are good (and by implication which are not-good) as objective facts. I wish you'd stop doing that. I presented an argument for why *in my opinion* there is no problem with TC members voting on their own patches. You are welcome to disagree, but that is exactly why I am proposing a vote. -- 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".