From: James Almer <jamrial@gmail.com>
To: ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Regarding Git Tooling
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2025 23:56:33 -0300
Message-ID: <5f25042f-b32d-4f53-8d04-7de2d4cfc2b9@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250121024106.GF4991@pb2>
[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2267 bytes --]
On 1/20/2025 11:41 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 02:26:24AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 02:39:29PM -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)
>>>
>>> If we evaluate this as choosing a software appliance and put aside
>>> "who is the host" I think we can have a good discussion. There could
>>> be value in coming to consensus on one step, then moving on to the
>>> next.
>>>
>>> The goal is not to spin around on which tool is better but I am wondering,
>>
>>> - What other options would the community consider and any relevant pros/cons?
>>
>> I dont know why the options are exclusive. One can add a Forgejo on ffmpeg.org
>> but leave the Mailing List/Patch Workflow in place for cases where the
>> maintainer or patch author prefers a ML workflow.
>>
>> I mean just add an option and see what happens
>> Who uses it ?
>> do people submit patches to it ?
>> do people enjoy working with it ?
>> do people hate working with it ?
>
> also to elaborate because i have this feeling everything i say lately is
> misinterpreted
>
> if we have Forgejo + ML we can still decide to drop one later and use only
> one.
>
> THis was just a suggestion that seemed easier to agree with for everyone
> than a hard switch vs not switch.
>
> thx
I don't think Forgejo's comment section for commits, bugs and MRs is
good enough for discussion, so i doubt the ML would go anywhere. It will
just stop being used for patches and reviews as MRs would replace them.
[-- Attachment #1.2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 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".
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-21 2:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-20 20:39 Marth64
2025-01-20 21:09 ` Nicolas George
2025-01-20 21:12 ` Marth64
2025-01-20 22:25 ` Nicolas George
2025-01-20 22:44 ` Marth64
2025-01-20 23:28 ` Marth64
2025-01-22 12:39 ` Nicolas George
2025-01-27 20:39 ` Jan Ekström
2025-01-27 20:55 ` Timo Rothenpieler
2025-01-20 22:44 ` compn
2025-01-20 22:14 ` Leo Izen
2025-01-21 1:26 ` Michael Niedermayer
2025-01-21 1:56 ` Soft Works
2025-01-21 2:38 ` Michael Niedermayer
2025-01-21 3:22 ` Soft Works
2025-01-21 3:56 ` Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel
2025-01-21 4:03 ` Soft Works
2025-01-21 4:07 ` Marth64
2025-01-21 7:17 ` Nicolas George
2025-01-21 1:57 ` compn
2025-01-21 2:41 ` Michael Niedermayer
2025-01-21 2:56 ` James Almer [this message]
2025-01-21 3:34 ` Soft Works
2025-01-21 11:51 ` Niklas Haas
2025-01-21 17:55 ` Frank Plowman
2025-01-21 18:20 ` Niklas Haas
2025-01-21 12:04 ` Niklas Haas
2025-01-21 15:39 ` Lynne
2025-01-21 15:54 ` Michael Niedermayer
2025-01-21 16:14 ` Soft Works
2025-01-22 0:38 ` Soft Works
2025-01-22 1:08 ` Marth64
2025-01-22 2:00 ` Soft Works
2025-01-22 6:41 ` martin schitter
2025-01-25 7:54 ` Soft Works
2025-01-25 19:17 ` martin schitter
2025-01-25 22:20 ` Marth64
2025-01-21 16:22 ` James Almer
2025-01-21 17:48 ` Michael Niedermayer
2025-01-21 17:57 ` James Almer
2025-01-21 18:14 ` Niklas Haas
2025-01-25 6:57 ` Rémi Denis-Courmont
2025-01-21 16:37 ` James Almer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5f25042f-b32d-4f53-8d04-7de2d4cfc2b9@gmail.com \
--to=jamrial@gmail.com \
--cc=ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Git Inbox Mirror of the ffmpeg-devel mailing list - see https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:
git clone --mirror https://master.gitmailbox.com/ffmpegdev/0 ffmpegdev/git/0.git
# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
public-inbox-init -V2 ffmpegdev ffmpegdev/ https://master.gitmailbox.com/ffmpegdev \
ffmpegdev@gitmailbox.com
public-inbox-index ffmpegdev
Example config snippet for mirrors.
AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git