Re: [FFmpeg-devel] STF 2025 grant request (2025-09-01 target)

[Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>]

On Wed, 20 Aug 2025, 11:37 Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel, <
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:

> Hi Pierre
>
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 09:28:26AM -0700, Pierre-Anthony Lemieux via
> ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 9:24 AM Niklas Haas via ffmpeg-devel
> > <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 12 Aug 2025 08:32:39 -0700 Pierre-Anthony Lemieux <
> pal@sandflow.com> wrote:
> > > > Quick reminder that the deadline for submitting your proposal is
> > > > quickly approaching.
> > > >
> > > > Also note that the total amount of the proposed projects is below for
> > > > the minimum threshold for STF to consider the application.
> > >
> > > Despite my initial reservations, I decided to also apply with another
> > > continuation of the libswscale project. Just letting you know as a
> heads up
> > > that I will add my proposal to the wiki shortly.
> > >
> > > How much more is currently needed to meet the minimum threshold?
> >
> > @Michael Niedermayer How many of the 100 modules do you realistically
> > expect to complete?
>
> I think the main uncertainilities are
> 1. If teh community preferrs merges or cherry picks,
>     If they want cherry picks its 100 patch(sets) passing review, adding
> tests
>     where samples are on our server.
>     If we do it as a merge, the work is still there but its different
> likely
>     less work.
>     Code would be merged in one go, then people could still review the
>     individual modules afterwards, and I still would have the same effort
> to
>     do to add tests and handle reviews. But maybe fewer people will post
>     reviews with a merge than with cherry picks
> 2.
>     when the work starts, because i intend to submit some patchset to test
>     the whole process as soon as i am not busy with other work in ffmpeg
>     So we might end up with fewer than 100 if we do some before STF starts
> 3.
>     In all this I assume that the review process is fairly smooth and
> requests
>     for major changes would be very rare because that would not work with
> the
>     number of modules.
>     And i assume that either we have testsamples or we dont and so the work
>     adding tests is manageable. But the devil is in the details and tests
>     can lead to detected bugs if the results are different between archs
>     and so on. And then I would have to debug and fix that unknown number
> of
>     bugs
>
> So really if everything is smooth i expect all 100 but if issues arise
> it can be less.
> I will know how badly i miscalcuated this only afterwards ;)
>
> thx
>

Cherry picking Paul's fork is clearly a destructive and hostile act and is
not good use of STF funds.

STF funds are not there to fund your vendetta against Paul and other forks.

Kieran

>
_______________________________________________
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".