On Wed, 29 Jan 2025 06:12:30 -1000 compn <f...@hawaiiantel.net> wrote: > On Wed, 29 Jan 2025 16:16:29 +0100, Niklas Haas wrote: > > > I think the most important crux of the problem is a fundamental disagreement > > between Michael and the "community" (for lack of a better term) about the > > role > > of the CC (and by extension, the GA). Michael is under the impression that > > they > > (should) serve a mere advisory role, with Michael himself having final say > > in > > matters both technical and non-technical. The "community", on the other > > hand, > > seems to be under the impression that the CC/GA is supposed to have the > > final > > say. > > > > I think that resolving this core dispute is the only way to quiet these > > non-stop > > discussions, either by making it clear that the CC, TC and GA are merely > > advisory > > with no actual power, or by Michael stepping down and handing control over > > ffmpeg.org to the GA (via vote of new root admin). > > ffmpeg is ran by the community currently, and always has been.
It is run by a very, *very* vocal minority of the community. > ffmpeg has never been ran by a vote. there have always been multiple > people in charge of the ffmpeg server. i know, because i've been here > for 20 years. > > we can see how badly something ran by GA vote works right now. with our > own eyes. ffmpeg just had a vote for the CC and two developers > immediately quit working in the CC. why did we just waste all that > time with a vote then? This is a fallacious argument because it rests on an empty hypothesis. The CC has never had any actual power, ergo it is impossible to use it as an example of what a community-led project would have looked like. On the other hand, there are plenty of precedents out there in the wider FOSS world that show that community-led projects can work just fine. > > michael is not a supervillain. saying its "michael vs the > community" ? please stop with these personal statements against > any individual developers in the project on this mailing list. Michael is the current de-facto leader. It is literally impossible for me to phrase it in any other way that does not unduly single him out as long as this remains the status quo. > if people are going to fork, then fork. ffmpeg has plenty of active and > inactive forks. its not the end of the world. just a fork. I thought we agreed that it's best to avoid this outcome if possible? > > i hope a certain vocal subset of people will stop blackmailing this > project with the "if we dont get our way, we'll quit/fork" stuff. its > not a friendly nor professional ultimatum. At this point, I don't think it will stop until something changes. > > -compn > _______________________________________________ > 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". _______________________________________________ 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".
