From: Soft Works <softworkz@hotmail.com>
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/4] doc/developer.texi: extend the argument for submitting patches
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2022 16:38:26 +0000
Message-ID: <DM8P223MB036593DC993795DFDFFE140FBA059@DM8P223MB0365.NAMP223.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <166844242020.20155.16539393327108846682@lain.khirnov.net>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of
> Anton Khirnov
> Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 5:14 PM
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-
> devel@ffmpeg.org>
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/4] doc/developer.texi: extend
> the argument for submitting patches
>
> Quoting Soft Works (2022-11-14 16:13:29)
> > > I did read your document, and my takeaway message from it is
> "doing
> > > it
> > > properly is too hard". As long as that continues to be your
> position,
> > > you might as well not bother.
> >
> > This is ridiculous, and you know that. Or at least you would know
> > if you would have really tried to understand the problem.
> >
> > And that unfortunately applies to some others as well. Nobody is
> > willing to go deep enough to the point where it becomes clear
> > that a "perfect" solution would only be possible by making
> fundamental
> > changes to libavfilter, which are complex, risky and something
> > that would never be accepted from me, even when it would be
> > the most excellent solution.
>
> Stop with the drama, please. You are not a persecuted misunderstood
> genius. Nobody here has a personal grudge against you. The reason
> people, including me, are objecting to your patches is that they are
> not
> fundamental enough. You want to redo the subtitle API in a major way,
> but keep it saddled with legacy hacks right from the start. We have
> enough of those already to know we don't want any more.
This is so disgusting!
Why can't you just point at those "legacy hacks" and tell how you
want to have it done instead?
"not fundamental enough"?
Where why and how?
And why do you keep bullshitting me with such nonsense statements?
What are your points? Which are your objections? Please show the
code that you think is wrong and say how it should be done instead.
Thanks,
softworkz
_______________________________________________
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:[~2022-11-14 16:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-14 9:13 [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 1/4] doc/developer.texi: improve the introductory text Anton Khirnov
2022-11-14 9:13 ` [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/4] doc/developer.texi: extend the argument for submitting patches Anton Khirnov
2022-11-14 9:35 ` Soft Works
2022-11-14 9:53 ` Anton Khirnov
2022-11-14 10:46 ` Soft Works
2022-11-14 11:07 ` Anton Khirnov
2022-11-14 11:20 ` Soft Works
2022-11-14 11:40 ` Soft Works
2022-11-14 12:42 ` Nicolas George
2022-11-14 14:34 ` Anton Khirnov
2022-11-14 15:13 ` Soft Works
2022-11-14 15:18 ` Paul B Mahol
2022-11-14 15:39 ` Soft Works
2022-11-14 15:45 ` Soft Works
2022-11-14 16:13 ` Anton Khirnov
2022-11-14 16:38 ` Soft Works [this message]
2022-11-14 16:40 ` Nicolas George
2022-11-14 17:25 ` Soft Works
2022-11-14 17:47 ` Nicolas George
2022-11-14 22:05 ` Michael Niedermayer
2022-11-14 22:49 ` Soft Works
2022-11-14 9:13 ` [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 3/4] doc/developer.texi: demote the "contributing" chapter to a section Anton Khirnov
2022-11-14 9:13 ` [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 4/4] doc/developer.texi: refine the "contributing code" section Anton Khirnov
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=DM8P223MB036593DC993795DFDFFE140FBA059@DM8P223MB0365.NAMP223.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM \
--to=softworkz@hotmail.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