On 1/21/2025 12:54 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > Hi > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 01:04:45PM +0100, Niklas Haas wrote: >> On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 14:39:29 -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) >> >> Since our last discussion at VDD, I have come to prefer Forgejo over GitLab >> and would be in favor of hosting an instance on ffmpeg.org. >> > >> What are the current barriers to doing this. Michael, since you said that you >> are in favor iff the community agrees with it, should we start a GA vote on >> the matter? > > I would instead of a secret GA vote, maybe wait a few days for discussion > to settle down and then just ask people on the ML about (yes vs no) (strong vs weak) > and a short paragraph about a switch to Forgejo We can always start a Condorcet vote where the requirement is that only non-anonymous votes are considered, if you think that will help (Maybe it can even be forced to actually cast your vote?). A vote using mail replies in a thread with yes/no is hard to follow. Also, the vote can happen after a thread with replies stating support for one or another solution, with optional argumentation if there's something to say that hasn't been said already. > > As well as a 2nd question: > namely on the threshold > should we switch if we have 51% ? or no strong opposition ? or how to draw > the line? Ideally, there would be two votes. One to open the question if we move away from ML patches, and then one to choose between Forgejo/Gitlab, if the first vote succeeds. But i don't know if people will be ok with that. > Also, should we switch if we loose some developers by doing so? > > Its possible that will give us a clear consensus already > If not, taking another look at the comments from people strongly > opposing in context of yes/no votes in general seems worthy. > > Either way i think if this ends with 45% vs 55% i would feel uneasy > I would like to see a clear preferrance of the community, something like > 20% vs 80%. > > I think a simple count of yes/no strong/weak and what threshold people prefer > seems enough and it seems like "richer" in information. > If this doesnt work out we can just try again in 3 months and if it fails again > we can still go for some hard formal vote. And maybe by the time we will have > cleared up some of the governance disagreements > > >> >> Can Timo set it up and maintain it for us? > > IIUC timo can do it but he should reply himself i think > > thx > > [...] > > > _______________________________________________ > 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".