On 29/10/2016 16:53, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote: > On 28.10.2016 19:31, compn wrote: >> On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 15:42:22 -0300 James Almer wrote: >>> On 10/27/2016 3:36 PM, Reynaldo H. Verdejo Pinochet wrote: >>>> On 10/27/2016 11:25 AM, James Almer wrote: >>>>> This is not how things were agreed. >>>> I haven't agreed to this. >>> You could have shown your displeasure in the relevant discussion and >>> patch threads, and on IRC. Why didn't you? >>> >>> A quick search on the archive shows >>> https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2016-April/192808.html >>> https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2016-July/196500.html >> >> but then there was this in september, after the news entry was posted >> >> http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2016-September/199686.html >> >> i'd suggest talking to that person before applying said patch. >> >> we can talk before applying a patch still, right? :) > > What's the current status of this "Resurrection of ffserver"? > Is there a work-in-progress git repository available somewhere? > > Best regards, > Andreas
There's no benefit in waiting for this to occur before ffserver is removed as it will always be in git history. Removing ffserver from master may even speed up the "resurrection of ffserver". I think this shouldn't be delayed any further. -- Josh PGP fingerprint: A93A602D7A6D3C5388D792BCD052D40DDEF9703D
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
