From: Koushik Dutta <koushd@gmail.com>
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] GSoC 2025
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2025 13:20:19 -0800
Message-ID: <CAO4LPj-pG9U6sXMkBc238k-p8hz5hywTy2kpcA4dQa=9n-Lnaw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABGuwE=9KX6EFUTUEXx27To4EqN1XrnQJJ9_-s6MNntEX9LRRA@mail.gmail.com>
Why gitlab and not GitHub? If the intent is on making contribution from new
developers easier, I think the workflow should be where the majority of
developers are actively participating.
On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 11:32 AM Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel <
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 7:01 PM Michael Niedermayer
> <michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Yigithan
> >
> > Its good that you bring these issues up.
> > Discussing about them is a step towards solving them
> >
> > see my coments inline below
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 06:51:40PM +0300, Yigithan Yigit wrote:
> > > Hi Michael,
> > >
> > > I want to give some feedback before GSoC’25 as GSoC’24 participant. I
> speak for myself but I know some of other colleagues are sharing similar
> thoughts with me.
> > >
> > > First of all community has incredible talented people and I am not
> even single percent of those people. However I tried my best during the
> qualification stage and after that. My main problem was finding answer's
> inside a huge codebase. I might come stupid ideas, bad implementations but
> to be honest when I asked about something in IRC I couldn’t get any
> answers, even in my volumedetect(qual patch) I couldn’t get a proper review
> from community.
> > >
> >
> > > Guessing contributors are mostly the passionate driven. I find that
> passion beginning but lost day by day. I tried to share similar thought
> during VDD, they told me this is normal and happening. Which shouldn’t be
> in my opinion. If project wants to
> >
> > yes, i also agree that this should not happen
> >
> >
> > > newcomers or continuous contributors people should be more welcoming.
> I understand you can’t force people to review some patches but still there
> are some parts needed to be change, I can’t say specifically which parts
> but they should be changed.
> >
> > Its a complex problem
> >
> > The average age of developers is becoming older, (meaning there are
> fewer new developers joining than in the past)
> >
> > many now are payed by companies to do specific work for a company.
> > Meaning they have less time to do what the community and FFmpeg needs
> > as they spend time to do what the company needs
> > I think people should attempt to shift payed feature implementation
> towards payed maintaince and
> > reviewing patches, picking up an area and maintaining it as their day job
> >
> > What is impotant is to have maintainers for every part of the codebase.
> > But to have a passionate and dedicated maintainer, often either he needs
> > to have authority or needs to be paid.
> >
> > Both we fail at. AND also it needs the mindset that maintainers are
> needed.
> >
> > For the payment,
> > for example carl, who took care of the bug tracker for years (something
> truly important)
> > should have been hired by some company to continue that work, it would
> have
> > made economic sense to these companies actually.
> >
> > Another example for Payment is the souvereign tech fund. last year we
> for the
> > first time got accepted BUT first it was really hard to find developers
> who
> > where willing to agree to do the work. And then there was a huge amount
> of
> > infighting.
> >
> > The problem is there is not a mindset of "this makes sense", "lets do
> it" but
> > much more a mindset of bickering on whatevr the other did.
> >
> > Also various company executives could have encouranged the employees to
> do
> > maintaince work for FFmpeg STF. Would have cost them 0, would have made a
> > huge difference in how many people would have been available!
> >
> > And about authority.
> > We have some developers who want to have a say in everything. That just
> takes
> > all passion out for some people. I also think this was a big factor why
> Paul forked
> >
> > So IMO, the mindset of the FFmpeg team needs to change. If one sees
> another
> > working on something lets say a booth or STF, or anything code related or
> > anything code unrelated the idea would be to be supportive. <--- This
> would help I belive
> >
> > The other change would be to draw clear lines and clearly give authority
> to
> > people in their area so they have some borders that shield them from
> things
> > that take their passion away. Which then makes them stop maintaining the
> code
> > and that then takes the passion of contributors away.
> >
> > Or maybe to put this another way. Try to have exactly 1 cook in every
> kitchen
> > If you intend to eat the resulting food.
>
> OMG a GSoC student is complaining about how hard the contribution
> process is and you've turned it into "yet another Michael wall of
> text" that has nothing to do with the topic but instead yet another
> incoherent airing of your current grievances and the usual defence of
> your buddies.
>
> It's clear the contribution method is outdated and difficult to
> manage. We need to move to GitLab ASAP (the name Forgejo will put
> people off, I mean seriously, Esperanto names in 2025, what a joke)
> with proper CI. Otherwise people like the OP will be put off. I have
> lots of people on the assembly course looking at the mailing list like
> it's a fax machine.
>
> 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".
>
_______________________________________________
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:[~2025-01-30 21:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-28 2:21 Michael Niedermayer
2025-01-29 15:51 ` Yigithan Yigit
2025-01-29 19:01 ` Michael Niedermayer
2025-01-29 19:31 ` Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel
2025-01-29 20:01 ` Ronald S. Bultje
2025-01-30 6:36 ` Vittorio Giovara
2025-01-30 10:21 ` Sean McGovern
2025-01-30 18:40 ` Michael Niedermayer
2025-01-30 21:20 ` Koushik Dutta [this message]
2025-01-30 14:53 ` compn
2025-01-31 5:01 ` Soft Works
2025-01-31 0:24 ` Vittorio Giovara
2025-01-31 12:51 ` 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='CAO4LPj-pG9U6sXMkBc238k-p8hz5hywTy2kpcA4dQa=9n-Lnaw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=koushd@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