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 01D964A1E0 for ; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 11:41:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.1.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2665D68D35C; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 13:41:01 +0200 (EET) Received: from mail0.khirnov.net (red.khirnov.net [176.97.15.12]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A66F768D2C6 for ; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 13:40:54 +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=gF5+FBgh; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mail0.khirnov.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64045240DAC for ; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 12:40:54 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail0.khirnov.net ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mail0.khirnov.net [IPv6:::1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP id sI0OcTc8ZUhu for ; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 12:40:52 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=khirnov.net; s=mail; t=1711280452; bh=qmIsHxFg4I2vOKddh6x6N3WJhZLK1A6AhfJWU1xiHkw=; h=Subject:From:To:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=gF5+FBghqwjXkYjDlmert3LfNoLEXzy7gNTMz3c6L8WdH2+5Kd1EIDgwMtZucvgim vDDUuNOe2m6yAY9pwK5WS3eOmKnCLjqE201LpvK7n7Gg2EbmqTeuhuz5hoW3CZFemv y4/PNFf2CV/tBKeN5NzQK1bQsz9clkWCom9dOb/KbxRz6eESJYWGgv35rF3PWRzs+2 GBDPb/8ji/19LaDmE7Ib+yvNTuOLXMHhjsdc0blkAEzPSyqDZUAE4y/nO2cl/acCkz J8J6P356veh0Ldc6EsMnXd8d5ypI4+bwJKT/qwq5BjQsRuDUrd/EMgMuOjVy1BYvY+ L5/CYH8jcKFeQ== 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 2FB152404AF for ; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 12:40:52 +0100 (CET) Received: by lain.khirnov.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 1D62E1601B9; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 12:40:52 +0100 (CET) From: Anton Khirnov To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches In-Reply-To: <20240324022150.GG6420@pb2> References: <170841737762.27417.14992162535824834057@lain.khirnov.net> <170931439255.29002.12138406678517187858@lain.khirnov.net> <171111197597.7287.15050275581822945754@lain.khirnov.net> <20240324022150.GG6420@pb2> Mail-Followup-To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2024 12:40:52 +0100 Message-ID: <171128045209.7287.814725259924083330@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 (2024-03-24 03:21:50) > On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 01:52:55PM +0100, Anton Khirnov wrote: > > Michael, > > > following up on the previous discussion in this thread - if you, > > personally, would like to vote for a different option than those > > suggested so far, please propose one. > > The goal of the vote is to find the option which most people prefer. > Not the option that I personally prefer. My point is that you should suggest options that you personally prefer, not invent options for some imaginary people who cannot speak for themselves. There is no evidence of them existing. > You also added 3 options yourself, which i presume you dont all > intend to vote for yourself Keeping the line without change and deleting it entirely seem like obvious "null" choices to me, but I can remove them if you prefer. > Simply omiting opposing options is not how Democracy works You're misrepresenting my point. It's not about "opposing" options, I have no issue with adding those suggested by Nicolas or Gyan. I have an issue with options that nobody actually wants. > You could discuss with others and try to find a smaller set of options > that still represent all cases the team may want. The discussion already happened. We have all the options that actual people have actually wanted. So kindly stop this obstructionism. -- 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".