* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-17 13:49 [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025 Michael Niedermayer
@ 2024-05-17 14:43 ` Ronald S. Bultje
2024-05-19 11:29 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
2024-05-17 14:47 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
` (7 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread
From: Ronald S. Bultje @ 2024-05-17 14:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
Hi,
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 9:50 AM Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>
wrote:
> * Fund professional real live presence on multimedia / FOSS / buisness
> related
> events. we already refund individuals but i think we are lacking on the
> organizational
> side. We should also have on these events at least one person who can
> awnser developer/user
> questions and someone who can awnser buisness questions (on buisness
> related events).
>
Maybe not 100% the same thing, but ... As you say, there's several of us
(including me) that attend some of these events. In addition to sponsoring
more people to go, I'd be very excited to wear FFmpeg gear and at least
make the FFmpeg brand more visible. (Right now I wear videolan gear at most
events.) Make some nice-looking hoodies etc. that we'd like to wear and
find an efficient way to distribute them.
Ronald
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-17 14:43 ` Ronald S. Bultje
@ 2024-05-19 11:29 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
0 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel @ 2024-05-19 11:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ffmpeg-devel; +Cc: Thilo Borgmann
On 17.05.24 16:43, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 9:50 AM Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>
> wrote:
>
>> * Fund professional real live presence on multimedia / FOSS / buisness
>> related
>> events. we already refund individuals but i think we are lacking on the
>> organizational
>> side. We should also have on these events at least one person who can
>> awnser developer/user
>> questions and someone who can awnser buisness questions (on buisness
>> related events).
>>
>
> Maybe not 100% the same thing, but ... As you say, there's several of us
> (including me) that attend some of these events. In addition to sponsoring
> more people to go, I'd be very excited to wear FFmpeg gear and at least
> make the FFmpeg brand more visible. (Right now I wear videolan gear at most
> events.) Make some nice-looking hoodies etc. that we'd like to wear and
> find an efficient way to distribute them.
We have FFmpeg designs for T-Shirts and Hoodies.
From the last badge we ordered there are still plenty of T-Shirts.
I'd sent around a large badge vial mail all over the world some years
ago and if there is enough demand I could do that again.
Also I could bring stuff to FOSDEM or other cons for distribution if I'd
know the demand from developers.
We had occasionally some stuff with us to give away to users. However
this is not very practical for anything where we'd need to hop into a
plane for due to weight & space restrictions. Always having some swag to
give away would produce costs for us.
-Thilo
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-17 13:49 [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025 Michael Niedermayer
2024-05-17 14:43 ` Ronald S. Bultje
@ 2024-05-17 14:47 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
2024-05-19 11:29 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
2024-05-17 15:08 ` Vittorio Giovara
` (6 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread
From: Rémi Denis-Courmont @ 2024-05-17 14:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
Le 17 mai 2024 16:49:58 GMT+03:00, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> a écrit :
>Hi all
>
>Before this is forgotten again, better start some dicsussion too early than too late
>
>I propose that if we have the oppertunity again next year to receive a grant
>from STF. That we use it to fund:
>
>* Paul to work on FFmpeg full time. My idea here is that he can work on whatever
> he likes in FFmpeg (so its not full time employment for specific work but
> simply full time employment for him to work on whatever he likes in FFmpeg any
> way he likes) Paul is the 2nd largest contributor to FFmpeg (git shortlog -s -n)
There are many grave flaws with such an idea. In the first place, it is far from certain that he himself would agree to such a deal at this point. And if he did, it is not clear that he would agree to follow the project's defined practices.
And ultimately, being paid to do whatever you want is not much different from fictitious employment or embezzlement, which is probably illegal in Germany (for good reasons).
It is also a less than ideal time for that sort of proposal: there are quite a few members of the community who may be wanting to be paid to work on FFmpeg, and it just doesn't seem fair that someone would be paid to do literally whatever they want, no matter how much they have contributed.
>* Fund administrative / maintainance work (one example is the mailman upgrade that is needed
> with the next OS upgrade on one of our servers (this is not as trivial as one might
> expect). Another example here may be some git related tools if we find something that
> theres a broad consensus about.
I agree that this should be paid but I would expect that STF would not be too keen on it, not that I'd know really.
>* Fund maintaince on the bug tracker, try to reproduce bugs, ask users to provide
> reproduceable cases, close bugs still unreproduceable, ...
> ATM we have over 2000 "new" bugs that are not even marked as open
This is a double-edged sword. If somebody gets paid to do that, then that is one more reason for others not to do it.
And again, it is completely reasonable to be paid for that, and also for code reviews and writing test cases (if we want to complete the menial task list), but I am perplexed as to STF's stance on that.
>* Fund professional real live presence on multimedia / FOSS / buisness related
> events. we already refund individuals but i think we are lacking on the organizational
> side. We should also have on these events at least one person who can awnser developer/user
> questions and someone who can awnser buisness questions (on buisness related events).
> Also we need some eye catching things there, a big screen/projector that plays some
> real time filtered version from a camera. Or maybe have more people remotely be available
> from the FFmpeg team through real time streaming (as in, if someone wants to be on some event
> but cant physically go there, we could put a notebook on the table facing visitors showing
> something like a video chat. Also we need more cute girls on these events, everything i hear
> its 100% male geeks/hackers. Also a "24/7" realtime stream from any booth would be nice
This is not something that STF should pay for, AFAIU. This is something that professionals should pay out of their budget (or their employer's) for the business events, and SPI for cheap/community events, IMO.
Br,
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-17 14:47 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
@ 2024-05-19 11:29 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
2024-05-19 12:08 ` Andrew Sayers
2024-05-20 18:51 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
0 siblings, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel @ 2024-05-19 11:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ffmpeg-devel; +Cc: Thilo Borgmann
[...]
>> * Fund administrative / maintainance work (one example is the mailman upgrade that is needed
>> with the next OS upgrade on one of our servers (this is not as trivial as one might
>> expect). Another example here may be some git related tools if we find something that
>> theres a broad consensus about.
>
> I agree that this should be paid but I would expect that STF would not be too keen on it, not that I'd know really.
We should absolutely pay for such activity and STF is very well willing
to fund such things.
>> * Fund maintaince on the bug tracker, try to reproduce bugs, ask users to provide
>> reproduceable cases, close bugs still unreproduceable, ...
>> ATM we have over 2000 "new" bugs that are not even marked as open
>
> This is a double-edged sword. If somebody gets paid to do that, then that is one more reason for others not to do it.
>
> And again, it is completely reasonable to be paid for that, and also for code reviews and writing test cases (if we want to complete the menial task list), but I am perplexed as to STF's stance on that.
Same as above about that we should and STF would. Especially since no
corporate interest usually pays anyone for these tasks (in case of
reviews it might of course be considered a good thing).
The one problem to solve here AFAICT is we don't know exactly what
quantity of bugs, reviewable code submissions and other maintenance work
will come up in the next 12 months.
So it renders impossible to define in prior the workload, milestones and
compensation per contributor interested as we did this year for
well-defined tasks.
What we should consider IMO is defining the tasks (patch review, bug
review & fix, FATE extensions, checkasm extensions, etc. as well such
things for the administrative tasks from above) and defining a budget
for these tasks.
Then, allow 'everyone interested' (aka git push access?) to claim a part
of that budget every N-months, depending what the corresponding
contributor actually did and can somehow be determined.
Regarding STF, this could visualize as one big milestone per task with a
budget of X and this group of people working on it. How exactly the
money distributes from there, depends on the actual work done afterwards.
However, there are many questions about the details for our side and
probably on the STF side. We should however start with at least one of
these tasks aiming for next year, trying to setup some process that
would work for us and can then be aligned with what is possible with STF.
>> * Fund professional real live presence on multimedia / FOSS / buisness related
>> events. we already refund individuals but i think we are lacking on the organizational
>> side. We should also have on these events at least one person who can awnser developer/user
>> questions and someone who can awnser buisness questions (on buisness related events).
>> Also we need some eye catching things there, a big screen/projector that plays some
>> real time filtered version from a camera. Or maybe have more people remotely be available
>> from the FFmpeg team through real time streaming (as in, if someone wants to be on some event
>> but cant physically go there, we could put a notebook on the table facing visitors showing
>> something like a video chat. Also we need more cute girls on these events, everything i hear
>> its 100% male geeks/hackers. Also a "24/7" realtime stream from any booth would be nice
>
> This is not something that STF should pay for, AFAIU. This is something that professionals should pay out of their budget (or their employer's) for the business events, and SPI for cheap/community events, IMO.
I think we should fund all non-b2b appearances.
About b2b, I wouldn't like our donation based money to be spent. We had
corporate sponsorship in the past not having to think about it and
possibly will have that as well in the future. The companies are
interested in seeing us there and some are willing to pay for that
happening.
I think we could as well get dedicated STF money to cover such costs not
being dependent on supportive companies and plan ahead better.
That is nothing that 'professionals' should pay out of their budget or
should even be allowed to do as we talk about a presence for the
open-source project, not some company's presence.
-Thilo
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-19 11:29 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
@ 2024-05-19 12:08 ` Andrew Sayers
2024-05-20 18:51 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
1 sibling, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Sayers @ 2024-05-19 12:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
On Sun, May 19, 2024 at 01:29:43PM +0200, Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
>
> [...]
> > > * Fund administrative / maintainance work (one example is the mailman upgrade that is needed
> > > with the next OS upgrade on one of our servers (this is not as trivial as one might
> > > expect). Another example here may be some git related tools if we find something that
> > > theres a broad consensus about.
> >
> > I agree that this should be paid but I would expect that STF would not be too keen on it, not that I'd know really.
>
> We should absolutely pay for such activity and STF is very well willing to
> fund such things.
>
>
> > > * Fund maintaince on the bug tracker, try to reproduce bugs, ask users to provide
> > > reproduceable cases, close bugs still unreproduceable, ...
> > > ATM we have over 2000 "new" bugs that are not even marked as open
> >
> > This is a double-edged sword. If somebody gets paid to do that, then that is one more reason for others not to do it.
> >
> > And again, it is completely reasonable to be paid for that, and also for code reviews and writing test cases (if we want to complete the menial task list), but I am perplexed as to STF's stance on that.
>
> Same as above about that we should and STF would. Especially since no
> corporate interest usually pays anyone for these tasks (in case of reviews
> it might of course be considered a good thing).
>
> The one problem to solve here AFAICT is we don't know exactly what quantity
> of bugs, reviewable code submissions and other maintenance work will come up
> in the next 12 months.
> So it renders impossible to define in prior the workload, milestones and
> compensation per contributor interested as we did this year for well-defined
> tasks.
>
> What we should consider IMO is defining the tasks (patch review, bug review
> & fix, FATE extensions, checkasm extensions, etc. as well such things for
> the administrative tasks from above) and defining a budget for these tasks.
> Then, allow 'everyone interested' (aka git push access?) to claim a part of
> that budget every N-months, depending what the corresponding contributor
> actually did and can somehow be determined.
Another solution would be to have a variable-sized primary task, with a
secondary task that can absorb leftover time. For example, if your primary
task was reviewing patches, your secondary task might be improving the patch
review process. So when you get to the point where you'd rather let someone
else claim a bounty than say "fix your indentation" one more time, your
incentive is instead to write a tutorial, or a review bot, or otherwise get to
the root cause.
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-19 11:29 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
2024-05-19 12:08 ` Andrew Sayers
@ 2024-05-20 18:51 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
2024-05-21 18:43 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
2024-05-24 21:42 ` Michael Niedermayer
1 sibling, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Rémi Denis-Courmont @ 2024-05-20 18:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ffmpeg-devel
Le sunnuntaina 19. toukokuuta 2024, 14.29.43 EEST Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-
devel a écrit :
> [...]
>
> >> * Fund administrative / maintainance work (one example is the mailman
> >> upgrade that is needed>>
> >> with the next OS upgrade on one of our servers (this is not as trivial
> >> as one might expect). Another example here may be some git related
> >> tools if we find something that theres a broad consensus about.
> >
> > I agree that this should be paid but I would expect that STF would not be
> > too keen on it, not that I'd know really.
> We should absolutely pay for such activity and STF is very well willing
> to fund such things.
Again, I don't know but that seems to stray from their stated goals. Also this
is most certainly not a full-time job, and it requires a very high level of
trust. In practice, what this really means is paying Michael.
It is more of a question whether STF is willing to pay for this, and whether a
reasonable task description with a reasonable average prorated workload and a
pay can be defined.
> > And again, it is completely reasonable to be paid for that, and also for
> > code reviews and writing test cases (if we want to complete the menial
> > task list), but I am perplexed as to STF's stance on that.
> Same as above about that we should and STF would.
> Especially since no corporate interest usually pays anyone for these tasks
Sadly true, but...
> (in case of reviews it might of course be considered a good thing).
I think some review is better than none. There may be conflict of interests,
but they are weighed by the risk of being caught abusing the review process.
> The one problem to solve here AFAICT is we don't know exactly what
> quantity of bugs, reviewable code submissions and other maintenance work
> will come up in the next 12 months.
People would normally do this as interruption task whilst developing code (or
writing documentation or whatever else) when there are no bugs and no review
pending. Just like server admin, this is not a full-time job and we can't
really pretend that it is.
> So it renders impossible to define in prior the workload, milestones and
> compensation per contributor interested as we did this year for
> well-defined tasks.
If you can't define workload, deliverables and cost, you wouldn't normally get
funding. So I don't see much point in arguing about this. We can all agree
that it is a conundrum, and that won't make the requirement go away.
> What we should consider IMO is defining the tasks (patch review, bug
> review & fix, FATE extensions, checkasm extensions, etc. as well such
> things for the administrative tasks from above) and defining a budget
> for these tasks.
In principles, all work deserves compensation. In practice, giving money in
such small units sounds extremely impractical.
Also...
> Then, allow 'everyone interested' (aka git push access?) to claim a part
> of that budget every N-months, depending what the corresponding
> contributor actually did and can somehow be determined.
... with the current relatively small budget (even including STF funding),
that would be a pittance for most people. I think we are better off paying a
few people correctly than paying a lot of people peanuts - even leaving aside
the administrative gas factory that this would add up to.
> > This is not something that STF should pay for, AFAIU. This is something
> > that professionals should pay out of their budget (or their employer's)
> > for the business events, and SPI for cheap/community events, IMO.
> I think we should fund all non-b2b appearances.
Of course we should reimburse reasonable transporation and accomodation costs,
and of course goodies, as as been done already. Whether it's B2B, B2C or
community is not really the criterion: we should simply *not* pay for booth
space, booth installation or exhibitor tickets. It just so happens that in
practice mostly only community conferences would allow us to hold a booth for
free.
> About b2b, I wouldn't like our donation based money to be spent. We had
> corporate sponsorship in the past not having to think about it and
> possibly will have that as well in the future. The companies are
> interested in seeing us there and some are willing to pay for that
> happening.
If the conference/tradeshow organisers want to use FFmpeg as a marketing
argument to attract attendees, they should provide a free booth. There is
simply no way that FFmpeg would recoup its expenditure on a booth. It is not
selling anything, additional donations are very unlikely to end us in the
black, and the chance of finding a new contributor at B2B or B2C shows is also
pretty much zilch.
If the booth is paid for by a business, then well that's a case of
"professionals paying for it out of their budget", assuming that there are no
hidden costs such as setup costs.
--
雷米‧德尼-库尔蒙
http://www.remlab.net/
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-20 18:51 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
@ 2024-05-21 18:43 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
2024-05-21 19:42 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
2024-05-24 21:42 ` Michael Niedermayer
1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread
From: Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel @ 2024-05-21 18:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ffmpeg-devel; +Cc: Thilo Borgmann
On 20.05.24 20:51, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
> Le sunnuntaina 19. toukokuuta 2024, 14.29.43 EEST Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-
> devel a écrit :
>> [...]
>>
>>>> * Fund administrative / maintainance work (one example is the mailman
>>>> upgrade that is needed>>
>>>> with the next OS upgrade on one of our servers (this is not as trivial
>>>> as one might expect). Another example here may be some git related
>>>> tools if we find something that theres a broad consensus about.
>>>
>>> I agree that this should be paid but I would expect that STF would not be
>>> too keen on it, not that I'd know really.
>> We should absolutely pay for such activity and STF is very well willing
>> to fund such things.
>
> Again, I don't know but that seems to stray from their stated goals. Also this
> is most certainly not a full-time job, and it requires a very high level of
> trust. In practice, what this really means is paying Michael.
>
> It is more of a question whether STF is willing to pay for this, and whether a
> reasonable task description with a reasonable average prorated workload and a
> pay can be defined.
Again, I do know. "...STF is very well willing to fund such things."
does not sound like an assumption to me.
>>> And again, it is completely reasonable to be paid for that, and also for
>>> code reviews and writing test cases (if we want to complete the menial
>>> task list), but I am perplexed as to STF's stance on that.
>
>> Same as above about that we should and STF would.
>> Especially since no corporate interest usually pays anyone for these tasks
>
> Sadly true, but...
>
>> (in case of reviews it might of course be considered a good thing).
>
> I think some review is better than none. There may be conflict of interests,
> but they are weighed by the risk of being caught abusing the review process.
I hope you realize what you argue in favor of. Reviews need to be
unbiased and independent. STF sponsoring reviews could be an excellent
help towards this.
Corporate influence on the review process already happened in the past
and the chance of getting caught is almost zero.
About the rest, I think you already said that you don't find funding
non-full-time positions useful in another thread - no need to reiterate
that I don't agree with that nor with your assumptions that should lead
to that.
-Thilo
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-21 18:43 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
@ 2024-05-21 19:42 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
2024-05-21 19:43 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
2024-05-21 21:34 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
0 siblings, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Rémi Denis-Courmont @ 2024-05-21 19:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ffmpeg-devel
Le tiistaina 21. toukokuuta 2024, 21.43.44 EEST Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
a écrit :
> >> Same as above about that we should and STF would.
> >> Especially since no corporate interest usually pays anyone for these
> >> tasks
> >
> > Sadly true, but...
> >
> >> (in case of reviews it might of course be considered a good thing).
> >
> > I think some review is better than none. There may be conflict of
> > interests, but they are weighed by the risk of being caught abusing the
> > review process.
> I hope you realize what you argue in favor of.
Yes. It's quoted above.
Are you claiming that *no* review is better than *some* review done in
*public* for all to see by a paid professional just because the person is
maybe biased?
First, even volunteers have their own biases. Any expert should have opinions
from their experience, and that by definition makes them "biased".
And second, you can't have it both ways. Either we want people to be paid for
review, and they will be answerable to their sponsor, or we want people to
continue to work on their free time.
STF is an agency of the German government, applying German government
policies. They certainly do seem to have their own biases, including on tech,
e.g.: https://www.theregister.com/2024/05/20/huawei_germany_ban/ to take just
the most recent example to come to mind.
> Reviews need to be unbiased and independent.
Ideally so but that's the land of utopia.
> STF sponsoring reviews could be an excellent help towards this.
If STF is willing to sponsor reviews, that's welcome. But that would certainly
not be "independent".
> Corporate influence on the review process already happened in the past
> and the chance of getting caught is almost zero.
So how do you that it happened if it does not get caught?
And "I hope you realise that you are arguing for" Intel, Loongson, etc.
employees to stop reviewing patches.
--
レミ・デニ-クールモン
http://www.remlab.net/
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-21 19:42 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
@ 2024-05-21 19:43 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
2024-05-21 21:34 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
2024-05-21 21:34 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread
From: Rémi Denis-Courmont @ 2024-05-21 19:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ffmpeg-devel
Le tiistaina 21. toukokuuta 2024, 22.42.00 EEST Rémi Denis-Courmont a écrit :
> And "I hope you realise that you are arguing for" Intel, Loongson, etc.
> employees to stop reviewing patches.
P.S.: And FFlabs too, since it is a for-profit company.
--
レミ・デニ-クールモン
http://www.remlab.net/
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-21 19:43 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
@ 2024-05-21 21:34 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
0 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel @ 2024-05-21 21:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ffmpeg-devel; +Cc: Thilo Borgmann
On 21.05.24 21:43, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
> Le tiistaina 21. toukokuuta 2024, 22.42.00 EEST Rémi Denis-Courmont a écrit :
>> And "I hope you realise that you are arguing for" Intel, Loongson, etc.
>> employees to stop reviewing patches.
>
> P.S.: And FFlabs too, since it is a for-profit company.
Same remark as in the previous mail. I'm not sure how you mean that
whole thing. Please elaborate / put in other words.
-Thilo
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-21 19:42 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
2024-05-21 19:43 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
@ 2024-05-21 21:34 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
2024-05-22 12:27 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread
From: Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel @ 2024-05-21 21:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ffmpeg-devel; +Cc: Thilo Borgmann
On 21.05.24 21:42, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
> Le tiistaina 21. toukokuuta 2024, 21.43.44 EEST Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
> a écrit :
>>>> Same as above about that we should and STF would.
>>>> Especially since no corporate interest usually pays anyone for these
>>>> tasks
>>>
>>> Sadly true, but...
>>>
>>>> (in case of reviews it might of course be considered a good thing).
>>>
>>> I think some review is better than none. There may be conflict of
>>> interests, but they are weighed by the risk of being caught abusing the
>>> review process.
>> I hope you realize what you argue in favor of.
>
> Yes. It's quoted above.
>
> Are you claiming that *no* review is better than *some* review done in
> *public* for all to see by a paid professional just because the person is
> maybe biased?
>
> First, even volunteers have their own biases. Any expert should have opinions
> from their experience, and that by definition makes them "biased".
>
> And second, you can't have it both ways. Either we want people to be paid for
> review, and they will be answerable to their sponsor, or we want people to
> continue to work on their free time.
I think that is what you don't understand.
An STF sponsorship for review would not introduce any bias in favor or
against some patch or sth related.
A company sponsorship would as it would introduce a bias towards 'we
want our stuff in'.
STF has no stuff they want to be reviewed on their behalf.
They are only in favor of stuff being reviewed.
> STF is an agency of the German government, applying German government
> policies. They certainly do seem to have their own biases, including on tech,
> e.g.: https://www.theregister.com/2024/05/20/huawei_germany_ban/ to take just
> the most recent example to come to mind.
No. Does not apply to any funding we might get.
>> Reviews need to be unbiased and independent.
>
> Ideally so but that's the land of utopia.
Of course, we talk about what should be, don't we?
>> STF sponsoring reviews could be an excellent help towards this.
>
> If STF is willing to sponsor reviews, that's welcome. But that would certainly
> not be "independent".
It would. As STF would not send patches we'd be obliged to review.
They'd give us money just for the sake of review 'whatever comes our way'.
>> Corporate influence on the review process already happened in the past
>> and the chance of getting caught is almost zero.
>
> So how do you that it happened if it does not get caught?
I assume you mean how I know that and the guilty ones did not get
caught? Well they did. An answer in public I will give not.
> And "I hope you realise that you are arguing for" Intel, Loongson, etc.
> employees to stop reviewing patches.
Syntax error. What exactly do you mean?
According to my assumptions: No, I value reviews of company employees
in general which have been proven to be useful and unbiased e.g. in
getting part of the community reviewing 'stuf' but not their 'own stuff'.
-Thilo
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-21 21:34 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
@ 2024-05-22 12:27 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
2024-05-24 7:11 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread
From: Rémi Denis-Courmont @ 2024-05-22 12:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
Le 22 mai 2024 00:34:03 GMT+03:00, Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> a écrit :
>>> I hope you realize what you argue in favor of.
>>
>> Yes. It's quoted above.
>>
>> Are you claiming that *no* review is better than *some* review done in
>> *public* for all to see by a paid professional just because the person is
>> maybe biased?
>>
>> First, even volunteers have their own biases. Any expert should have opinions
>> from their experience, and that by definition makes them "biased".
>>
>> And second, you can't have it both ways. Either we want people to be paid for
>> review, and they will be answerable to their sponsor, or we want people to
>> continue to work on their free time.
>
>I think that is what you don't understand.
You're not answering the question here. The current STF funding of 153k€ for 2 years is roughly enough to pay for ONE full-time entry-level software engineer in Germany. Even if this were doubled with another similar round of funding next year, and even if that was to be reliably renewed year on year, and assuming that STF keeps an hands-off approach of not influencing the work, that will *not* be enough to pay all reviewers.
So is it better to have no reviews or reviews by skilled corporate employees?
(...)
>> Ideally so but that's the land of utopia.
>
>Of course, we talk about what should be, don't we?
Of course *not*. There is no point debating ideals that we can all agree on and that will never come to fruition. Rather this is all about how to concretely apply or not apply to STF, and more generally how to try to improve the sustainability of FFmpeg in a realistic manner.
>> And "I hope you realise that you are arguing for" Intel, Loongson, etc.
>> employees to stop reviewing patches.
>
>Syntax error. What exactly do you mean?
I fail to see a syntax error. You're saying that corporate employees should not review because "they [will] want to get [their]" or their colleagues' "stuff in" (your words).
Intel and Loongson are obvious current examples of companies whose employees are pushing and reviewing enablement patches for their commercial hardware. That is very definitely not "unbiased" nor "independent".
>According to my assumptions: No, I value reviews of company employees in general which have been proven to be useful and unbiased e.g. in getting part of the community reviewing 'stuf' but not their 'own stuff'.
I never said that I wanted biased reviews. I said some reviews were better than none, in spite of the risk of bias.
So much for your grandstanding against my alleged not realising what I am advocating for, if you end up agreeing with me...
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-22 12:27 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
@ 2024-05-24 7:11 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
2024-05-24 7:56 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread
From: Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel @ 2024-05-24 7:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ffmpeg-devel; +Cc: Thilo Borgmann
Am 22.05.24 um 14:27 schrieb Rémi Denis-Courmont:
>
>
> Le 22 mai 2024 00:34:03 GMT+03:00, Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> a écrit :
>>>> I hope you realize what you argue in favor of.
>>>
>>> Yes. It's quoted above.
>>>
>>> Are you claiming that *no* review is better than *some* review done in
>>> *public* for all to see by a paid professional just because the person is
>>> maybe biased?
>>>
>>> First, even volunteers have their own biases. Any expert should have opinions
>>> from their experience, and that by definition makes them "biased".
>>>
>>> And second, you can't have it both ways. Either we want people to be paid for
>>> review, and they will be answerable to their sponsor, or we want people to
>>> continue to work on their free time.
>>
>> I think that is what you don't understand.
>
> You're not answering the question here. The current STF funding of 153k€ for 2 years is roughly enough to pay for ONE full-time entry-level software engineer in Germany. Even if this were doubled with another similar round of funding next year, and even if that was to be reliably renewed year on year, and assuming that STF keeps an hands-off approach of not influencing the work, that will *not* be enough to pay all reviewers.
>
> So is it better to have no reviews or reviews by skilled corporate employees?
Your one question above was: "Are you claiming that [...] because the person is maybe biased?"
And I answered about the biasing problem.
>>> And "I hope you realise that you are arguing for" Intel, Loongson, etc.
>>> employees to stop reviewing patches.
>>
>> Syntax error. What exactly do you mean?
>
> I fail to see a syntax error. You're saying that corporate employees should not review because "they [will] want to get [their]" or their colleagues' "stuff in" (your words).
>
> Intel and Loongson are obvious current examples of companies whose employees are pushing and reviewing enablement patches for their commercial hardware. That is very definitely not "unbiased" nor "independent".
Unfortunately true, yet you argue to pay more companies to do reviews instead having reviews funded by unbiased means.
>> According to my assumptions: No, I value reviews of company employees in general which have been proven to be useful and unbiased e.g. in getting part of the community reviewing 'stuf' but not their 'own stuff'.
>
> I never said that I wanted biased reviews. I said some reviews were better than none, in spite of the risk of bias.
>
> So much for your grandstanding against my alleged not realising what I am advocating for, if you end up agreeing with me...
I think we don't agree. You would want to pay some comapny/companies to do review work while I'd want reviewers to be paid directly without a middle man and corporate bias.
-Thilo
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-20 18:51 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
2024-05-21 18:43 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
@ 2024-05-24 21:42 ` Michael Niedermayer
1 sibling, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Michael Niedermayer @ 2024-05-24 21:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1285 bytes --]
Hi
On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 09:51:25PM +0300, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
> Le sunnuntaina 19. toukokuuta 2024, 14.29.43 EEST Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-
> devel a écrit :
> > [...]
> >
> > >> * Fund administrative / maintainance work (one example is the mailman
> > >> upgrade that is needed>>
> > >> with the next OS upgrade on one of our servers (this is not as trivial
> > >> as one might expect). Another example here may be some git related
> > >> tools if we find something that theres a broad consensus about.
> > >
> > > I agree that this should be paid but I would expect that STF would not be
> > > too keen on it, not that I'd know really.
> > We should absolutely pay for such activity and STF is very well willing
> > to fund such things.
>
> Again, I don't know but that seems to stray from their stated goals. Also this
> is most certainly not a full-time job, and it requires a very high level of
> trust. In practice, what this really means is paying Michael.
I did not and do not intend to do the mailman or OS upgrade work. I hope
someone else will.
thx
[...]
--
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
The misfortune of the wise is better than the prosperity of the fool.
-- Epicurus
[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-17 13:49 [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025 Michael Niedermayer
2024-05-17 14:43 ` Ronald S. Bultje
2024-05-17 14:47 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
@ 2024-05-17 15:08 ` Vittorio Giovara
2024-05-17 19:08 ` Michael Niedermayer
2024-05-17 15:25 ` Andrew Sayers
` (5 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread
From: Vittorio Giovara @ 2024-05-17 15:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 9:50 AM Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>
wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Before this is forgotten again, better start some dicsussion too early
> than too late
>
> I propose that if we have the oppertunity again next year to receive a
> grant
> from STF. That we use it to fund:
>
> * Paul to work on FFmpeg full time. My idea here is that he can work on
> whatever
> he likes in FFmpeg (so its not full time employment for specific work but
> simply full time employment for him to work on whatever he likes in
> FFmpeg any
> way he likes) Paul is the 2nd largest contributor to FFmpeg (git
> shortlog -s -n)
>
why? nothing against Paul, but this seems pretty arbitrary, and many people
would like to be paid to do whatever they want
if we start sponsoring people there should be clear statements of work,
goals, and everything in between
* Fund administrative / maintainance work (one example is the mailman
> upgrade that is needed
> with the next OS upgrade on one of our servers (this is not as trivial
> as one might
> expect). Another example here may be some git related tools if we find
> something that
> theres a broad consensus about.
>
> * Fund maintaince on the bug tracker, try to reproduce bugs, ask users to
> provide
> reproduceable cases, close bugs still unreproduceable, ...
> ATM we have over 2000 "new" bugs that are not even marked as open
>
I see no mention of github/gitlab work, despite being highly requested on
the list.
Is it because we assume it'll be done already by next year? :)
> something like a video chat. Also we need more cute girls on these
> events, everything i hear
> its 100% male geeks/hackers. Also a "24/7" realtime stream from any
> booth would be nice
>
I understand the idea comes from a good place, but the way it is phrased is
very sketchy.
--
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-17 15:08 ` Vittorio Giovara
@ 2024-05-17 19:08 ` Michael Niedermayer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Michael Niedermayer @ 2024-05-17 19:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2417 bytes --]
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 11:08:17AM -0400, Vittorio Giovara wrote:
> On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 9:50 AM Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all
> >
> > Before this is forgotten again, better start some dicsussion too early
> > than too late
> >
> > I propose that if we have the oppertunity again next year to receive a
> > grant
> > from STF. That we use it to fund:
> >
> > * Paul to work on FFmpeg full time. My idea here is that he can work on
> > whatever
> > he likes in FFmpeg (so its not full time employment for specific work but
> > simply full time employment for him to work on whatever he likes in
> > FFmpeg any
> > way he likes) Paul is the 2nd largest contributor to FFmpeg (git
> > shortlog -s -n)
> >
>
> why? nothing against Paul, but this seems pretty arbitrary, and many people
> would like to be paid to do whatever they want
> if we start sponsoring people there should be clear statements of work,
> goals, and everything in between
Sure, my goal is to have the whole team payed eventually to work on FFmpeg.
Paul is the most important ATM, he is the biggest contributor who stopped
contributing.
If it would succeed to fund him. I would suggest to repeat this with more
people.
The problem with "clear goals" is that paul without any rules or goals
did work on exactly what made sense for FFmpeg, I dont think adding any
rules will make this better.
>
> * Fund administrative / maintainance work (one example is the mailman
> > upgrade that is needed
> > with the next OS upgrade on one of our servers (this is not as trivial
> > as one might
> > expect). Another example here may be some git related tools if we find
> > something that
> > theres a broad consensus about.
> >
> > * Fund maintaince on the bug tracker, try to reproduce bugs, ask users to
> > provide
> > reproduceable cases, close bugs still unreproduceable, ...
> > ATM we have over 2000 "new" bugs that are not even marked as open
> >
>
> I see no mention of github/gitlab work, despite being highly requested on
> the list.
> Is it because we assume it'll be done already by next year? :)
that was supposed to be part of "git related tools"
thx
[...]
--
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
Observe your enemies, for they first find out your faults. -- Antisthenes
[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-17 13:49 [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025 Michael Niedermayer
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-17 15:08 ` Vittorio Giovara
@ 2024-05-17 15:25 ` Andrew Sayers
2024-05-17 15:26 ` Derek Buitenhuis
` (4 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Sayers @ 2024-05-17 15:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 03:49:58PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Before this is forgotten again, better start some dicsussion too early than too late
>
> I propose that if we have the oppertunity again next year to receive a grant
> from STF. That we use it to fund:
>
> * Paul to work on FFmpeg full time. My idea here is that he can work on whatever
> he likes in FFmpeg (so its not full time employment for specific work but
> simply full time employment for him to work on whatever he likes in FFmpeg any
> way he likes) Paul is the 2nd largest contributor to FFmpeg (git shortlog -s -n)
Instead of one person creating code five days a week, how about paying five
people to review code one day a week each? As well as being less divisive
among maintainers, a public list of people who are obliged to do reviews would
make us peripheral developers feel less like we're shouting into a void.
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-17 13:49 [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025 Michael Niedermayer
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-17 15:25 ` Andrew Sayers
@ 2024-05-17 15:26 ` Derek Buitenhuis
2024-05-17 18:50 ` Michael Niedermayer
2024-05-24 9:56 ` Andrew Sayers
` (3 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread
From: Derek Buitenhuis @ 2024-05-17 15:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ffmpeg-devel
On 5/17/2024 2:49 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> Also we need more cute girls on these events, everything i hear
> its 100% male geeks/hackers.
This is gross and sexist.
- Derek
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-17 15:26 ` Derek Buitenhuis
@ 2024-05-17 18:50 ` Michael Niedermayer
2024-05-17 19:22 ` Derek Buitenhuis
2024-05-17 19:54 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
0 siblings, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Michael Niedermayer @ 2024-05-17 18:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 866 bytes --]
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 04:26:55PM +0100, Derek Buitenhuis wrote:
> On 5/17/2024 2:49 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > Also we need more cute girls on these events, everything i hear
> > its 100% male geeks/hackers.
>
> This is gross and sexist.
This was definitly not meant to be either of that.
Let me reword this for 2024:
The people on the booth are predominantly male. Similarly ffmpeg-devel
is predominantly male. More gender diversity would be good.
And lets have some cute puppies and other animals on the booth as they
might attract some additional visitors.
Thx
[...]
--
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
Many things microsoft did are stupid, but not doing something just because
microsoft did it is even more stupid. If everything ms did were stupid they
would be bankrupt already.
[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-17 18:50 ` Michael Niedermayer
@ 2024-05-17 19:22 ` Derek Buitenhuis
2024-05-17 19:54 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
1 sibling, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Derek Buitenhuis @ 2024-05-17 19:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ffmpeg-devel
On 5/17/2024 7:50 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> The people on the booth are predominantly male. Similarly ffmpeg-devel
> is predominantly male. More gender diversity would be good.
That I can agree with.
- Derek
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-17 18:50 ` Michael Niedermayer
2024-05-17 19:22 ` Derek Buitenhuis
@ 2024-05-17 19:54 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
1 sibling, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Rémi Denis-Courmont @ 2024-05-17 19:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
Le 17 mai 2024 21:50:20 GMT+03:00, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> a écrit :
>Let me reword this for 2024:
>The people on the booth are predominantly male. Similarly ffmpeg-devel
>is predominantly male. More gender diversity would be good.
As you've noted, this is an obvious problem but not an FFmpeg-specific problem. It is a industry -wide problem, and to a large extent even a problem for all of STEM.
I don't think that paying people, specifically women, to staff FFmpeg booths would do any good. At best that would be putting the cart before the horse. Instead, we should get more females involved in the project, and that should naturally increase the ratio of women representing FFmpeg at events.
With that noted, I don't think that this has or should have anything to do with STF. Judging by the name, it is meant to improve tech for the German people and the world at large. There are other funds to address the underrepresentation of women in OSS, and by all means, engage with them if you want funding for that.
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-17 13:49 [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025 Michael Niedermayer
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-17 15:26 ` Derek Buitenhuis
@ 2024-05-24 9:56 ` Andrew Sayers
2024-05-24 10:50 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
2024-06-01 15:19 ` Tomas Härdin
` (2 subsequent siblings)
8 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Sayers @ 2024-05-24 9:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 03:49:58PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Before this is forgotten again, better start some dicsussion too early than too late
This comment is inspired by the other subthread, but not directly in reply to it.
I'm replying to this post rather than get in the middle of all that...
What happens if someone is hired to do a job that requires access to the ML,
then gets involved in a situation where there's talk of a ban?
If they're banned, does that translate to suspension without pay? With pay?
Banning such a person would jeopardise future funding - if they aren't banned,
will people be concerned about the apparent conflict of interest?
In a wider sense, hiring a single person to do a job we come to rely on (like
code review) gives the project a bus number of 1. How would the STF react to
a proposal like "we plan to do XYZ in 2025, but if we don't get funding for
2026, we'll drop Z and spend the time on a transition plan instead"?
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-24 9:56 ` Andrew Sayers
@ 2024-05-24 10:50 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
0 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel @ 2024-05-24 10:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ffmpeg-devel; +Cc: Thilo Borgmann
On 24.05.24 11:56, Andrew Sayers wrote:
> On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 03:49:58PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> Hi all
>>
>> Before this is forgotten again, better start some dicsussion too early than too late
>
> This comment is inspired by the other subthread, but not directly in reply to it.
> I'm replying to this post rather than get in the middle of all that...
Thanks :)
> What happens if someone is hired to do a job that requires access to the ML,
> then gets involved in a situation where there's talk of a ban?
>
> If they're banned, does that translate to suspension without pay? With pay?
>
> Banning such a person would jeopardise future funding - if they aren't banned,
> will people be concerned about the apparent conflict of interest?
Interesting and something we should think about.
I think the project's well-being should be the priority - meaning if we
vote for a ban of someone that was trusted enough to get a contact from
us in the first place, the ban should be executed - or any other measure
the CC or GA sees fit. Giving a work contact to someone shall not make
us dependent on that person to such an extent.
> In a wider sense, hiring a single person to do a job we come to rely on (like
> code review) gives the project a bus number of 1. How would the STF react to
> a proposal like "we plan to do XYZ in 2025, but if we don't get funding for
> 2026, we'll drop Z and spend the time on a transition plan instead"?
Speaking as an idealist, we should uphold our procedures independently
of what another entity (except the applicable law) thinks about our
decisions.
Realisticly speaking, we already got some feedback from STF about such
potential break aways on our end. Though these are of course never good
in any such business relation, these things do happen. So up to a
certain extend, it won't remove us from the program. Problems arise if
such things are getting frequent.
We also got another layer of protection vie the SPI linked in between.
If we sanction someone severely who is in current posession of a
contract to do some FFmpeg work, we might stop funding that and give
another contract to someone who can take over.
Not saying that this could work with any kind of work but can be an option.
That brings me to the idea that we need to check the contracts for
potential fail-safe clauses for such extreme cases like these.
Thanks,
Thnilo
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-17 13:49 [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025 Michael Niedermayer
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-24 9:56 ` Andrew Sayers
@ 2024-06-01 15:19 ` Tomas Härdin
2024-06-02 18:01 ` Michael Niedermayer
2024-06-04 15:04 ` Andrew Sayers
[not found] ` <2f71ddd5-150b-42ca-be4f-c987d26630ea@mail.de>
8 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread
From: Tomas Härdin @ 2024-06-01 15:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
fre 2024-05-17 klockan 15:49 +0200 skrev Michael Niedermayer:
> * Paul to work on FFmpeg full time. My idea here is that he can work
> on whatever
> he likes in FFmpeg (so its not full time employment for specific
> work but
> simply full time employment for him to work on whatever he likes in
> FFmpeg any
> way he likes) Paul is the 2nd largest contributor to FFmpeg (git
> shortlog -s -n)
Didn't Paul loudly "leave" the project less than one year ago?
> * Fund administrative / maintainance work (one example is the mailman
> upgrade that is needed
> with the next OS upgrade on one of our servers (this is not as
> trivial as one might
> expect). Another example here may be some git related tools if we
> find something that
> theres a broad consensus about.
Sounds reasonable
> * Fund maintaince on the bug tracker, try to reproduce bugs, ask
> users to provide
> reproduceable cases, close bugs still unreproduceable, ...
> ATM we have over 2000 "new" bugs that are not even marked as open
Reasonable
> * Fund professional real live presence on multimedia / FOSS /
> buisness related
> events.
Also reasonable. I could help man a booth at IBC or any other event in
Europe
> Also we need more cute girls on these events, everything i hear
> its 100% male geeks/hackers.
Michael please
/Tomas
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-06-01 15:19 ` Tomas Härdin
@ 2024-06-02 18:01 ` Michael Niedermayer
2024-06-02 18:16 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
2024-06-02 20:14 ` Tomas Härdin
0 siblings, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Michael Niedermayer @ 2024-06-02 18:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 735 bytes --]
Hi
On Sat, Jun 01, 2024 at 05:19:26PM +0200, Tomas Härdin wrote:
[...]
> > * Fund professional real live presence on multimedia / FOSS /
> > buisness related
> > events.
>
> Also reasonable. I could help man a booth at IBC or any other event in
> Europe
Iam strongly in favor of that! Though i have no idea about cost (for IBC)
which probably requires someone to sponsor a booth if its not free.
Or any details. But i think its probably best if you mail thilo as he
was helping with FFmpeg presence on many european booths
thx
[...]
--
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
Nations do behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives.
-- Abba Eban
[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-06-02 18:01 ` Michael Niedermayer
@ 2024-06-02 18:16 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
2024-06-02 20:14 ` Tomas Härdin
1 sibling, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Rémi Denis-Courmont @ 2024-06-02 18:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
Le 2 juin 2024 21:01:43 GMT+03:00, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> a écrit :
>Hi
>
>
>On Sat, Jun 01, 2024 at 05:19:26PM +0200, Tomas Härdin wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>> > * Fund professional real live presence on multimedia / FOSS /
>> > buisness related
>> > events.
>>
>> Also reasonable. I could help man a booth at IBC or any other event in
>> Europe
>
>Iam strongly in favor of that! Though i have no idea about cost (for IBC)
>which probably requires someone to sponsor a booth if its not free.
It is nothing like free. And accomodation prices in the area are absolutely horrendous at the time of IBC.
Also IME, the people there simply don't get open-source. They're there to find suppliers or clients. If you want to sell FFmpeg-derived services, it might make sense to attend.
As a foundation, it simply doesn't. So yeah, unless you get a sponsor to foot the bill, don't hold a booth.
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-06-02 18:01 ` Michael Niedermayer
2024-06-02 18:16 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
@ 2024-06-02 20:14 ` Tomas Härdin
2024-06-03 6:50 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
1 sibling, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread
From: Tomas Härdin @ 2024-06-02 20:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
sön 2024-06-02 klockan 20:01 +0200 skrev Michael Niedermayer:
> Hi
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 01, 2024 at 05:19:26PM +0200, Tomas Härdin wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > * Fund professional real live presence on multimedia / FOSS /
> > > buisness related
> > > events.
> >
> > Also reasonable. I could help man a booth at IBC or any other event
> > in
> > Europe
>
> Iam strongly in favor of that! Though i have no idea about cost (for
> IBC)
> which probably requires someone to sponsor a booth if its not free.
> Or any details. But i think its probably best if you mail thilo as he
> was helping with FFmpeg presence on many european booths
Attending is free, so I expect booths cost quite a bit to make up the
costs. There's an inquiry form on the IBC website. Can't hurt to ask
Hotels aren't cheap as Rémi points out. Last time I attended IBC we had
to get a hotel in Harlem. Luckily I know some people in Amsterdam
/Tomas
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-06-02 20:14 ` Tomas Härdin
@ 2024-06-03 6:50 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
2024-06-03 7:55 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel @ 2024-06-03 6:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ffmpeg-devel; +Cc: Thilo Borgmann
Am 02.06.24 um 22:14 schrieb Tomas Härdin:
> sön 2024-06-02 klockan 20:01 +0200 skrev Michael Niedermayer:
>> Hi
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 01, 2024 at 05:19:26PM +0200, Tomas Härdin wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>> * Fund professional real live presence on multimedia / FOSS /
>>>> buisness related
>>>> events.
>>>
>>> Also reasonable. I could help man a booth at IBC or any other event
>>> in
>>> Europe
>>
>> Iam strongly in favor of that! Though i have no idea about cost (for
>> IBC)
>> which probably requires someone to sponsor a booth if its not free.
>> Or any details. But i think its probably best if you mail thilo as he
>> was helping with FFmpeg presence on many european booths
>
> Attending is free, so I expect booths cost quite a bit to make up the
> costs. There's an inquiry form on the IBC website. Can't hurt to ask
>
> Hotels aren't cheap as Rémi points out. Last time I attended IBC we had
> to get a hotel in Harlem. Luckily I know some people in Amsterdam
We have a booth on IBC this year which again gets sponsored so no costs for FFmpeg.
Some details are still unclear which is why it's not yet announced.
@Thomas: Happy you want to attend, I'll keep you updated.
-Thilo
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-06-03 6:50 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
@ 2024-06-03 7:55 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
2024-06-03 11:35 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
[not found] ` <85865A16-B2BD-419C-857B-445ED6354604@cosmin.at>
2024-06-03 15:00 ` Vittorio Giovara
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 2 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Rémi Denis-Courmont @ 2024-06-03 7:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
Hi,
Le 3 juin 2024 09:50:15 GMT+03:00, Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> a écrit :
>We have a booth on IBC this year which again gets sponsored so no costs for FFmpeg.
>Some details are still unclear which is why it's not yet announced.
For the sake of clarity, on what basis are, or were, you negotiating a booth in the name of FFmpeg whilst keeping the community in the dark? Did SPI or Fabrice delegate this to you or something like that? How did we ensure that we don't end up with multiple people independently organising FFmpeg booths going forward if there is no coordination?
IBC is probably not as (cost-)problematic as NAB, w.r.t. setting up the booth or transportation, assuming people come from Europe, and the booth itself is paid for.
It makes sense for FFmpeg consultancies to market their services there. However accommodation costs are still huge, and having attended IBC a few times, I just don't really see much for FFmpeg as an open-source community to do there.
Indeed, it was not appropriate for GPAC to use an FFmpeg booth at IBC, and it likewise wouldn't be appropriate for them or for any for-profit company or consultant to use an FFmpeg booth at IBC. This is not even just a moral and PR problem, but also potentially fiscal and legal, but IANAL.
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-06-03 7:55 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
@ 2024-06-03 11:35 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
[not found] ` <85865A16-B2BD-419C-857B-445ED6354604@cosmin.at>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Rémi Denis-Courmont @ 2024-06-03 11:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
Le 3 juin 2024 10:55:45 GMT+03:00, "Rémi Denis-Courmont" <remi@remlab.net> a écrit :
>Hi,
>
>IBC is probably not as (cost-)problematic as NAB, w.r.t. setting up the booth or transportation, assuming people come from Europe, and the booth itself is paid for.
>
>Indeed, it was not appropriate for GPAC to use an FFmpeg booth at IBC,
I meant "at NAB" here, of course.
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <85865A16-B2BD-419C-857B-445ED6354604@cosmin.at>]
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
[not found] ` <85865A16-B2BD-419C-857B-445ED6354604@cosmin.at>
@ 2024-06-03 16:43 ` Cosmin Stejerean via ffmpeg-devel
2024-06-03 17:36 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread
From: Cosmin Stejerean via ffmpeg-devel @ 2024-06-03 16:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches; +Cc: Cosmin Stejerean
> On Jun 3, 2024, at 12:55 AM, Rémi Denis-Courmont <remi@remlab.net> wrote:
>
> IBC is probably not as (cost-)problematic as NAB, w.r.t. setting up the booth or transportation
What was cost-problematic about NAB? As far as I know it cost ffmpeg $0. It would be hard for IBC to be less cost-problematic than that.
- Cosmin
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-06-03 16:43 ` Cosmin Stejerean via ffmpeg-devel
@ 2024-06-03 17:36 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
[not found] ` <EF00C7AD-23E4-4AFB-BEC0-F9139F7B6051@cosmin.at>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread
From: Rémi Denis-Courmont @ 2024-06-03 17:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
Le 3 juin 2024 19:43:52 GMT+03:00, Cosmin Stejerean via ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> a écrit :
>
>
>> On Jun 3, 2024, at 12:55 AM, Rémi Denis-Courmont <remi@remlab.net> wrote:
>>
>> IBC is probably not as (cost-)problematic as NAB, w.r.t. setting up the booth or transportation
>
>What was cost-problematic about NAB? As far as I know it cost ffmpeg $0.
> It would be hard for IBC to be less cost-problematic than that.
Booth setup is notoriously expensive due to local regulations. This was already mentioned on the list earlier, and no explanations were given how this would be funded.
Well in hindsight, based on what was reported by NAB attendees, I surmise that the setup wasn't done nor funded at all and the booth was FFmpeg in name only. (That sounds like embezzlement to me but that is not really our problem, I guess.)
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-06-03 6:50 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
2024-06-03 7:55 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
@ 2024-06-03 15:00 ` Vittorio Giovara
2024-06-03 15:41 ` Tomas Härdin
2024-06-18 14:41 ` Tomas Härdin
3 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Vittorio Giovara @ 2024-06-03 15:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches; +Cc: Thilo Borgmann
On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 8:50 AM Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel <
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:
> Am 02.06.24 um 22:14 schrieb Tomas Härdin:
> > sön 2024-06-02 klockan 20:01 +0200 skrev Michael Niedermayer:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, Jun 01, 2024 at 05:19:26PM +0200, Tomas Härdin wrote:
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >>>> * Fund professional real live presence on multimedia / FOSS /
> >>>> buisness related
> >>>> events.
> >>>
> >>> Also reasonable. I could help man a booth at IBC or any other event
> >>> in
> >>> Europe
> >>
> >> Iam strongly in favor of that! Though i have no idea about cost (for
> >> IBC)
> >> which probably requires someone to sponsor a booth if its not free.
> >> Or any details. But i think its probably best if you mail thilo as he
> >> was helping with FFmpeg presence on many european booths
> >
> > Attending is free, so I expect booths cost quite a bit to make up the
> > costs. There's an inquiry form on the IBC website. Can't hurt to ask
> >
> > Hotels aren't cheap as Rémi points out. Last time I attended IBC we had
> > to get a hotel in Harlem. Luckily I know some people in Amsterdam
>
> We have a booth on IBC this year which again gets sponsored so no costs
> for FFmpeg.
>
TIL!
No intent of drama or stifle personal action, but shouldn't these kinds of
requests go through the GA? If anybody can do whatever they want with the
ffmpeg name, then what's the point of voting and following the established
process?
--
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-06-03 6:50 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
2024-06-03 7:55 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
2024-06-03 15:00 ` Vittorio Giovara
@ 2024-06-03 15:41 ` Tomas Härdin
2024-06-18 14:41 ` Tomas Härdin
3 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Tomas Härdin @ 2024-06-03 15:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
mån 2024-06-03 klockan 08:50 +0200 skrev Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-
devel:
> Am 02.06.24 um 22:14 schrieb Tomas Härdin:
> > sön 2024-06-02 klockan 20:01 +0200 skrev Michael Niedermayer:
> > > Hi
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jun 01, 2024 at 05:19:26PM +0200, Tomas Härdin wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > > * Fund professional real live presence on multimedia / FOSS /
> > > > > buisness related
> > > > > events.
> > > >
> > > > Also reasonable. I could help man a booth at IBC or any other
> > > > event
> > > > in
> > > > Europe
> > >
> > > Iam strongly in favor of that! Though i have no idea about cost
> > > (for
> > > IBC)
> > > which probably requires someone to sponsor a booth if its not
> > > free.
> > > Or any details. But i think its probably best if you mail thilo
> > > as he
> > > was helping with FFmpeg presence on many european booths
> >
> > Attending is free, so I expect booths cost quite a bit to make up
> > the
> > costs. There's an inquiry form on the IBC website. Can't hurt to
> > ask
> >
> > Hotels aren't cheap as Rémi points out. Last time I attended IBC we
> > had
> > to get a hotel in Harlem. Luckily I know some people in Amsterdam
>
> We have a booth on IBC this year which again gets sponsored so no
> costs for FFmpeg.
> Some details are still unclear which is why it's not yet announced.
Alright, cool
/Tomas
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-06-03 6:50 ` Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2024-06-03 15:41 ` Tomas Härdin
@ 2024-06-18 14:41 ` Tomas Härdin
3 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Tomas Härdin @ 2024-06-18 14:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
mån 2024-06-03 klockan 08:50 +0200 skrev Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-
devel:
> Am 02.06.24 um 22:14 schrieb Tomas Härdin:
> > sön 2024-06-02 klockan 20:01 +0200 skrev Michael Niedermayer:
> > > Hi
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jun 01, 2024 at 05:19:26PM +0200, Tomas Härdin wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > > * Fund professional real live presence on multimedia / FOSS /
> > > > > buisness related
> > > > > events.
> > > >
> > > > Also reasonable. I could help man a booth at IBC or any other
> > > > event
> > > > in
> > > > Europe
> > >
> > > Iam strongly in favor of that! Though i have no idea about cost
> > > (for
> > > IBC)
> > > which probably requires someone to sponsor a booth if its not
> > > free.
> > > Or any details. But i think its probably best if you mail thilo
> > > as he
> > > was helping with FFmpeg presence on many european booths
> >
> > Attending is free, so I expect booths cost quite a bit to make up
> > the
> > costs. There's an inquiry form on the IBC website. Can't hurt to
> > ask
> >
> > Hotels aren't cheap as Rémi points out. Last time I attended IBC we
> > had
> > to get a hotel in Harlem. Luckily I know some people in Amsterdam
>
> We have a booth on IBC this year which again gets sponsored so no
> costs for FFmpeg.
> Some details are still unclear which is why it's not yet announced.
>
> @Thomas: Happy you want to attend, I'll keep you updated.
Update: I probably won't be able to attend due to a scheduling conflict
/Tomas
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2024-05-17 13:49 [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025 Michael Niedermayer
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2024-06-01 15:19 ` Tomas Härdin
@ 2024-06-04 15:04 ` Andrew Sayers
[not found] ` <2f71ddd5-150b-42ca-be4f-c987d26630ea@mail.de>
8 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Sayers @ 2024-06-04 15:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 03:49:58PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Before this is forgotten again, better start some dicsussion too early than too late
Unless there's a better place to put these, I plan to reply to this message
whenever I notice someone bring up something that seems relevant.
Hopefully it will be a good reference if and when the time comes.
Sebastian Ramacher recently said this in another thread[1]:
> Maintainers and developers of reverse dependencies repeatedly ask for
> upgrade guides that go beyond "use this function instead"
This strikes me as an excellent bit of boring-but-important STF work.
The bug reports in that e-mail make it relatively easy to quantify impact -
measure the number of breakages in each revision, make a chart of numbers
over time, agree a target number for next time.
[1] https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2024-June/328852.html
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <2f71ddd5-150b-42ca-be4f-c987d26630ea@mail.de>]
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
[not found] ` <2f71ddd5-150b-42ca-be4f-c987d26630ea@mail.de>
@ 2025-04-22 22:58 ` Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel
2025-04-25 16:49 ` Michael Niedermayer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 67+ messages in thread
From: Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel @ 2025-04-22 22:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches; +Cc: Kieran Kunhya, Thilo Borgmann
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, 18:12 Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel, <
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am 17.05.24 um 15:49 schrieb Michael Niedermayer:
> > Hi all
> >
> > Before this is forgotten again, better start some dicsussion too early
> than too late
> >
> > I propose that if we have the oppertunity again next year to receive a
> grant
> > from STF. That we use it to fund:
> >
> > [...]
> the trac page for the STF 2025 application is available:
>
> https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/SponsoringPrograms/STF/2025
>
> If you want to propose a project, add it to the end of the page.
> Include an overview, a developer to work on it (most likely yourself), a
> duration and the milestones together with corresponding deliverables. There
> is a template, look at the 2024 page if you're unsure.
>
> We should finalize the discussion about proposed projects and create the
> application before end of the year, so that STF can start looking at our
> proposal first thing in 2025.
>
> Thanks,
> Thilo
>
This page is empty
>
_______________________________________________
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] 67+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] STF 2025
2025-04-22 22:58 ` Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel
@ 2025-04-25 16:49 ` Michael Niedermayer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 67+ messages in thread
From: Michael Niedermayer @ 2025-04-25 16:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches
Cc: Thilo Borgmann, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2642 bytes --]
Hi
On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 09:58:14PM -0100, Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2024, 18:12 Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel, <
> ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Am 17.05.24 um 15:49 schrieb Michael Niedermayer:
> > > Hi all
> > >
> > > Before this is forgotten again, better start some dicsussion too early
> > than too late
> > >
> > > I propose that if we have the oppertunity again next year to receive a
> > grant
> > > from STF. That we use it to fund:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > the trac page for the STF 2025 application is available:
> >
> > https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/SponsoringPrograms/STF/2025
> >
> > If you want to propose a project, add it to the end of the page.
> > Include an overview, a developer to work on it (most likely yourself), a
> > duration and the milestones together with corresponding deliverables. There
> > is a template, look at the 2024 page if you're unsure.
> >
> > We should finalize the discussion about proposed projects and create the
> > application before end of the year, so that STF can start looking at our
> > proposal first thing in 2025.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Thilo
> >
>
> This page is empty
Its not litterally empty, it contains templates and description how to add
entries. But no entries.
its a publically editable wiki. Any FFmpeg developer can add an entry
Last year I, Thilo and Pierre (and probably others) worked on and pushed
for STF sponsonsoring to happen. You know pushed people to add entries and
added entries myself so the minimum threashold was reached
Spend lots of time that was intended to be "not ffmpeg time" on doing the
work. And then was accused of "things", thilo was accused too. I think
Pierre saw us being accused and didnt want to become the next one.
I think Niklas wants to continue doing swscale work in 2025 with STF but
he hasnt added an entry yet. Maybe as some of the 2024 STF work got delayed
and took longer, i dont know.
That said, i would very much welcome Thilo and Pierre to manage this.
But it does require people to propose some projects. It also would
benefit from a friendlier environment.
Besides this
maybe people can use sozial media and twitter to remind all ffmpeg developers
to add entries to the STF 2025 wiki page. Otherwise it will be STF 2026 and
nothing in 2025
thx
[...]
--
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
Homeopathy is like voting while filling the ballot out with transparent ink.
Sometimes the outcome one wanted occurs. Rarely its worse than filling out
a ballot properly.
[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 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] 67+ messages in thread