[FFmpeg-devel] Re: [RFC] Funded Task Ideas

[Niklas Haas via ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>]

On Sun, 02 Nov 2025 03:09:39 +0100 Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:
> I like the idea
>
> Note, the SPI Vice President, who helped us with the STF stuff is possibly
> on vacation ATM (not 100% sure). And also this is the first sw development task we do without
> STF/GSoC/OPW. So there could be some extra delay.
> I thus suggest if we want to do this, that we move forward with it ASAP so that
> we dont add additional delay

What should the process be? Do I sign a SoW / contract with SPI first? Or
does e.g. Stefano just agree to the bounty? Who decides if a given merged
patch qualifies as satisfying the criteria? Should the GA have to vote on
approving bug bounties? What if somebody else decides to "snipe" a bug
bounty while the developer who proposed it is still working on it?

I personally think:

1. A contract is not necessary for a one-off bug bounty, just a written
   approval from SPI should be enough.

2. If there is a dispute, the TC should decide if a patch sufficiently
   addresses the bug bounty. (Of course, in such a case as the bug bounty
   involving a member of the TC, they would recuse themselves due to CoI)

3. A GA vote is only necessary if there are dissenting opinions, or
   ongoing disputes about the scope and amount of the bounty; let's say a
   week without objections should be enough to greenlight a bounty.

4. Developers should announce when they begin working on a bounty, and then
   nobody else should be able to claim it until a reasonable amount of
   time has passed. (Perhaps 12 weeks)
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org