Hi all, On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 12:32 AM Jim DeLaHunt <from.ffmpeg-...@jdlh.com> wrote: > 1. In doc/developer.texi, eliminate the single chapter, > and promote each section underneath to chapter, and > each subsection to section. Thus content and relative > structure remains the same, but the overall structure is > simpler. Anchors within the page remain the same.
I have manually applied this part of the patch, which is noncontroversial and a strict improvement to what we have right now. > 2. In doc/developer.texi, add a new section about > ffmpeg-devel, based on existing text from ffmpeg-cvslog > section regarding discussion of patches and of > development issues. The wording in https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2017-November/221199.html sounds good to me. > 3. In doc/developer.texi, rewrite the ffmpeg-cvslog section > to match the current usage of ffmpeg-cvslog. Some developers > choose to follow this list, but it is not mandatory. > +from all sources. Subscribing to this list is not mandatory, if > +all you want to do is submit a patch here and there. I would remove the "if" part, leaving only the "not mandatory" message. Over my tenure as FFmpeg developer I have never subscribed to -cvslog, since there are other ways of following FFmpeg development these days (subscribing to the FFmpeg repo on GitHub, for example). I am glad to see this sentiment echoed by Ronald and Rostislav. However, other than this technicality, I am in favor of the spirit of this part of the patch. ---- Carl, On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 3:03 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote: > If you believe that it is unclear that there is a difference between an > occasional contributor (who most likely would not read -devel nor > -cvslog) and a committer (who is supposed to read -cvslog), then > maybe a patch is useful. > > I believe the difference could be considered common sense. Thank you for expressing your opinion regarding this. However, I cannot say I agree with this evaluation. As I read this paragraph as it currently stands, the tone makes it sound like subscription is mandatory ("we expect you"). I believe the proposed modification is a significant improvement over the existing text. Additionally, from what I'm reading, it seems as if you believe subscribing to -cvslog is even more important than subscribing to -devel, which is false, plain and simple. Without further opinions from you, I will be applying this part of the patch in due time, by virtue of being the maintainer of Documentation. Thanks to you all, Timothy _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list email@example.com http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel