On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 01:34:55PM +0200, wm4 wrote: > On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 13:09:36 +0200 > Michael Niedermayer <mich...@niedermayer.cc> wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:07:42AM +0200, Nicolas George wrote: > > > Le sextidi 26 vendémiaire, an CCXXV, Michael Niedermayer a écrit : > > > > probably, yes > > > > > > I would have said exactly the opposite. It is nothing but a waste of time > > > and a pollution of the history. > > > > My idea here is to maximize the number of developers > > And if in cases where one doesnt really care much either way and > > someone else seems caring more one says, "ok" that may result in a happy > > new contributor. > > Saying "no" is more likely to turn someone away. > > and again, it doesnt really matter if the , is there after a > > final sentinel /count entry as no next field would ever be added > > Are you kidding me. Patches should be judged on their technical merrit, > not whether you might piss someone off by rejecting it.
this is about a cosmetic change having no real technical effect > > Rather, you'd keep someone on one's toes by giving him hope that his > patch might be accepted - and making him waste some more time on it. > Just with the result that other devs might reject the patch anyway, > which would make for a frustrating experience. > > > And ATM the "," thing is not consistent either way > > git grep '_NB$' |wc > > 53 114 2123 > > git grep '_NB,$' |wc > > 30 76 1499 > > > > Making this more consistent shouldnt be a bad thing if the people who > > want it also do the work ... (and it doesnt end as some rule that > > causes future work to people not caring ...) > > > > [...] > > That's true, but your grep has a huge number of false positives. it was just a quick, dirty and crude statistic, slightly better is: git grep '^[ A-Za-z0-9_]*_NB$' | wc 52 104 2018 git grep '^[ A-Za-z0-9_]*_NB,$' | wc 22 44 964 [...] -- 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.
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel