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 ESMTPS id B51864ACD0 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2025 15:54:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.1.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D44C68B69B; Tue, 21 Jan 2025 17:54:29 +0200 (EET) Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net (relay4-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.196]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 134B468A4EE for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2025 17:54:23 +0200 (EET) Received: by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7582BE0008 for ; Tue, 21 Jan 2025 15:54:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=niedermayer.cc; s=gm1; t=1737474862; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=u3DOLH5a4rhZ62pKyAasPNk34qipWm84/VQv0KJIXPw=; b=Fjns9lLFp3ylIwamgsI1A/pbx0Dp/Barkw8TkfY8IjSjf7twDUItRPmu7y7IMzx+P7RJri Ld93l2WI1YwrjJwO3TQ/7/eLk+JN/MT3SldT/lOY636l++QseSg+eSeKlniTG2qFEBuhQX oTFHjg2Vf1T1CTp5okS2XVeNsJzdJYl5r74AZkVjM5xhELI1VOjx+DMeK2RKSsMqovsJ3L FnnqBplz5YwE/Shu0jD3NQ7K2h2s5FM7B6qJoAOFtheq4y0UkPLjo/hOud0aRMip2I3JZJ Mu79qhO6ScbUM2TQtODEOpW3H6OqgDKjzIyWcsWmu54GHBd4TKGI9w/SAWp8ug== Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 16:54:21 +0100 From: Michael Niedermayer To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches Message-ID: <20250121155421.GH4991@pb2> References: <20250121130445.GD9168@haasn.xyz> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20250121130445.GD9168@haasn.xyz> X-GND-Sasl: michael@niedermayer.cc Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Regarding Git Tooling 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: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7088194494321563498==" Errors-To: ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org Sender: "ffmpeg-devel" Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Post: --===============7088194494321563498== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="SemVMHiCGW27EaGx" Content-Disposition: inline --SemVMHiCGW27EaGx Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 01:04:45PM +0100, Niklas Haas wrote: > On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 14:39:29 -0600 Marth64 wrote: > > Hello, in the context of a GA member, > > > > I think there is general interest in modernizing technical tooling > > specifically regarding ML/patch workflow vs. integrated git solution. > > Both have their merits. I think what we have today is optimized for > > some but cumbersome for many. Like shopping for a drill, it is good to > > step back from time to time and ensure we have the right tools. > > > > I think the problem statement of productivity being impacted from > > outgrowing the current tooling is different from who is hosting it. > > > > These are some options I noticed interest in (in no particular order): > > - Forgejo > > - GitLab > > - Mailing List/Patch Workflow (current solution) >=20 > Since our last discussion at VDD, I have come to prefer Forgejo over GitL= ab > and would be in favor of hosting an instance on ffmpeg.org. >=20 > What are the current barriers to doing this. Michael, since you said that= you > are in favor iff the community agrees with it, should we start a GA vote = on > the matter? I would instead of a secret GA vote, maybe wait a few days for discussion to settle down and then just ask people on the ML about (yes vs no) (strong= vs weak) and a short paragraph about a switch to Forgejo As well as a 2nd question: namely on the threshold should we switch if we have 51% ? or no strong opposition ? or how to draw the line? Also, should we switch if we loose some developers by doing so? Its possible that will give us a clear consensus already If not, taking another look at the comments from people strongly opposing in context of yes/no votes in general seems worthy. Either way i think if this ends with 45% vs 55% i would feel uneasy I would like to see a clear preferrance of the community, something like 20% vs 80%. I think a simple count of yes/no strong/weak and what threshold people pref= er seems enough and it seems like "richer" in information. If this doesnt work out we can just try again in 3 months and if it fails a= gain we can still go for some hard formal vote. And maybe by the time we will ha= ve cleared up some of the governance disagreements >=20 > Can Timo set it up and maintain it for us? IIUC timo can do it but he should reply himself i think thx [...] --=20 Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB Breaking DRM is a little like attempting to break through a door even though the window is wide open and the only thing in the house is a bunch of things you dont want and which you would get tomorrow for free anyway --SemVMHiCGW27EaGx Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EABEKAB0WIQSf8hKLFH72cwut8TNhHseHBAsPqwUCZ4/DKgAKCRBhHseHBAsP qyCBAJ9CrUUuqr369exx/a+GgCjrHv8YVwCeKZPDlxxDCtfEQcOH2rNzCHXTnfw= =B9PB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --SemVMHiCGW27EaGx-- --===============7088194494321563498== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ 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". --===============7088194494321563498==--