Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Add tools/merge-all-source-plugins

[Zhao Zhili <quinkblack-at-foxmail.com@ffmpeg.org>]

> On May 15, 2025, at 23:27, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote:
> 
> Hi Zhao Zhili
> 
> On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 06:58:54PM +0800, Zhao Zhili wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On May 14, 2025, at 18:55, Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Simple script to merge all source plugins.
>> 
>> I think this is confusing. The operation of merging multiple branches can hardly be considered
>> a plugin.
> 
> Each branch (well, there is just one ATM)
> 
> represents and contains exactly one plugin or you could also call it feature.
> merging that branch integrates that feature / plugin.
> 
> Its a very simple system, it achives many of the goals people have
> 1. simple
> 2. easy to maintain
> 3. it does not allow binary blobs without source
> 4. it allows people to develop code under their own rules

A plugin is accessories to the main project and cannot work independently on their own.
If I understand correctly, this strategy is working with other forks. A fork can merge other
forks as many as possible, and call itself the monolithic fork.

I want plugin support, mainly due to slow and hard building issues. Current strategy
doesn’t help in this case.

> 
> Let me elaborate on 4.
>    We are not a closed source company, people have the right to work on what
>    they want to work on. I think 99% of us agree here
> 
>    Fact is, this does not work in ffmpeg-devel currently, several people have
>    had their work rejected for non technical and non legal reasons.
>    We could remove the most aggressive people, that would reduce this issue
>    or we could support plugins (source plugins or classical plugins the details
>    dont matter as long as developers can develop their code on their own terms
>    and users can use them without censorship by someone)
>    We also could change the development model to be like linux where this problem
>    does not exist like this.
> 
>    So really, the way i think you should view plugins (and it could be a totally
>    different implementation of teh concept of a plugin than this here)
>    Is as a way to keep everyone in one team.
>    If we cant give people a way to develop code externally and still have
>    it accessible to users then we have to make it possible to develop
>    it inside ffmpeg. Or we will loose many new developers who all want to
>    develop something new and just cannot in this environment.
> 
>    That will lead to more conflicts and then the chance of people being kicked
>    out or leaving will also go up. And if 2 people disagree, the one who wants
>    to work should stay, and the one who wants to have a say in the work
>    of the other should leave. Its the obvious way. A person working
>    vs a person objecting to work. Which way will a project move forward ...
> 
>    I want to work, I want everyone else to be able to work, I want everyones
>    work to be available to the end user.
> 
> thanks
> 
> PS: we can of course rename merge-all-source-plugins if someone has a better
> name
> 
> [...]
> 
> -- 
> Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
> 
> If you think the mosad wants you dead since a long time then you are either
> wrong or dead since a long time.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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".