On Sat, May 4, 2024 at 9:06 AM Ondřej Fiala <ofi...@airmail.cc> wrote:
> On Sat May 4, 2024 at 3:11 AM CEST, flow gg wrote: > > I have tried git-send-email, but it failed. You can say that I am stupid, > > but I would say that this is because of various reasons such as my area > and > > the network. It is really not what I can solve. > > Maybe I will spend a lot of energy trying it in the future, but this is > > because I have submitted thousands of lines of code. I don't want to give > > up. If it is from the beginning, it will cause abandonment. > > > > Maybe I am younger here in FFMPEG. I have a lot of good young people > around > > me. They all use github/lab by default, and there will be the same > problem > > as me, resulting in abandonment. > I feel it's worth pointing out that SourceHut and mailing list-based > workflows > are becoming popular in some young-dev circles. I am in my twenties for > reference. > > With that said, I did not realize how problematic setting up git send-email > can be with some providers when I wrote what you're replying to. The > replies > quite surprised me honestly because when I first set up git send-email, I > was using completely average providers and it was all pretty effortless, > I just adjusted git's config and it worked perfectly. > > > I don't really care about the quality between these tools. I think people > > are important. I only want to use it, and I can facilitate the real > > reviewer of Review. > > > > I don't know if I can say my personal feelings here, but I will say: > > > > I feel despised by this passage, which makes me uncomfortable. If you > are a > > reviewer, maybe I have no chance to contribute, but anyway, I have made > > some contributions. > > > > > How can anyone use git, but not git send-email? Any decent email > provider > > > has support for external clients over SMTP. And I believe you *can* > > > > actually dictate that people don't attach patches -- if you have > control > > > over the mailing list software, you can set up a filter that rejects > such > > > emails and auto-replies with instructions on how to send them properly. > > I think I should have the right to contribute > Likewise. > > Regarding the part about rejecting patches as attachments, I was > specifically > reacting to Rémi claiming that he can't dictate that people don't use them, > which technically he can. I never said it's a good idea, though it might > have > sounded that way. Sorry about that. > > As I said multiple times, I feel like contributing over email is a lot > about > having good tooling. For example, the email client I use treats all parts > of > a multipart message the same, so it has no issues replying to text > attachments > instead of the message body. As such, there is no difference between > attached > patches and patches in the message body with such a client. > Is it me or has this thread and topic run its course? We understand your preference is email and it is duly noted, the overwhelming majority of the community still seem to prefer github/gitlab. Any further discussion at this point looks off topic, there are better venues for discussing the technical merits of email vs github/gitlab. -- Vittorio _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
