Am 11.06.16 um 18:35 schrieb Paul B Mahol: > On 6/11/16, Michael Niedermayer <mich...@niedermayer.cc> wrote: >> On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 01:55:01PM +0200, Clement Boesch wrote: >>> On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 12:57:13PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote: >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> the MAINTAINERs file contains a bunch of inaccurate and outdated >>>> entries. >>>> >>>> What should be done about this ? >>>> should we remove everyone who was inactive in FFmpeg >>>> (aka no commit/author since 2 years) as in git log --first-parent ... ? >>>> should we mark everyone above as inactive instead like "(inactive)" >>>> >>>> shuuld someone send mails to everyone and ask if they stil maintain >>>> the code they are listed for ? >>>> >>> >>> I'd say at most 30% of the file is still accurate, which means 70% of the >>> file could be dropped. And then we'll see that it's so small the file is >>> mostly irrelevant. >>> >>> Now I'd rather have the file used as a "community profile" to look for >>> qualified people in the various area of the project; or said differently, >>> keep only applications, misc areas, communication, generic parts entries. >>> >>> I feel like this file had for mission to be used as an argument to make >>> sure people are indeed responsible for their code (as in "hey you're the >>> maintainer of X, please review my patch"). Does it work? Did it in the >>> past? >> >> The file serves as the foundation of "who has/should have/needs >> git write access" and who has op on IRC >> (this works and worked) >> >> It serves as a list of arbiters case of disagreement >> (that wasnt used much at least not litterally) >> >> Without a MAINTAINERs file git write access and irc op could become >> more disputable >> >> I do like the unwritten? rule of >> "if you maintain some code you have the last word about it" >> "if you maintain some code you have git write access" >> "if someone disagrees about someone else maintaining then he better >> volunteers himself to do a better job" >> >> Now, if you look at the people who left FFmpeg over the years, i >> think in many if not most cases it involved prior conflicts with other >> developers over the area they worked on. >> so the idea of >> "if you maintain some code you have the last word about it" >> is IMO important, this doesnt strictly need a maintainers file of >> course. >> But many people work on what is fun for them, and while removing the >> file or chageing its meaning doesnt directly change that, i think we >> should be carefull to avoid creating a difference between the people >> actively working on the code and the ones being in charge about the >> code in question. >> >> [...] >> >> -- >> Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB >> >> Dictatorship: All citizens are under surveillance, all their steps and >> actions recorded, for the politicians to enforce control. >> Democracy: All politicians are under surveillance, all their steps and >> actions recorded, for the citizens to enforce control. >> > > If this file is not going to be cleaned up it should be removed.
I think this file should be kept and updated from time to time. We can very well ping some maintainers asking for reliability of their maintainership and mark/remove their entries. I also think every file of the source should be listed, even if there's just an inactive or no maintainer. I was looking for people to ask specifics and have been contacted by reference to that several times. This file makes perfect sense to me. -Thilo _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel