Hi again,
> I'm very sorry that it took me so long to send this to the list, finally.
> Since this is an everlasting topic for years, I wanted to deal
> thoroughly with it to have a chance to actually influence the situation.
>
> Like in many previous years/sessions about FFmpeg development, the
On 24.11.2018 16:32, Tomas Härdin wrote:
[...]
While I'm in here I have a small suggestion: talking is better than
writing when it comes to interpersonal conflicts. Using Mumble or
Jingle or whatever and getting the relevant people to talk can be a
good way to avoid more drastic measures.
On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 2:23 PM René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> I have had my ML subscriptions set to not receive emails for a few years now.
> So when I got the invitation to vote (which I don't consider Spam btw) my
> first reflex was to confirm that I do not have any current issues with
>
tor 2018-11-22 klockan 21:58 + skrev Rostislav Pehlivanov:
> > On Thu, 22 Nov 2018 at 19:02, Thilo Borgmann wrote:
> +The vote has to implement a direct, free, equal and secret election.
> > +The results are to be publicly available.
> > +The election should be completed not later than the
Hi,
I have had my ML subscriptions set to not receive emails for a few years now.
So when I got the invitation to vote (which I don't consider Spam btw) my first
reflex was to confirm that I do not have any current issues with perceived
hostility in the community.
Then, when I checked the few
On Thu, 22 Nov 2018, at 22:58, Rostislav Pehlivanov wrote:
> This is why I'm against formalizing such prodecures. They're too inflexible
> and absolute,
Enforcement depends on who is enforcing it. Hence elections.
> and end up being abused or overused (like videolan's weekly
> temporary
Am 22.11.18 um 22:58 schrieb Rostislav Pehlivanov:
> On Thu, 22 Nov 2018 at 19:02, Thilo Borgmann wrote:
>
>>
>> Please note that this survey is _not_ meant to be a vote about the
>> proposal. It is to
>> determine if we should actually have a refinement/vote on instantiating
>> such a
>>
>
> > What if a majority of the committee is biased and bans everyone they
> disagree with to take over the project? They certainly could.
> What if the committee's decision is something the majority of the
> developers disagree with?
>
> This is why I'm against formalizing such prodecures.
On Thu, 22 Nov 2018 at 19:02, Thilo Borgmann wrote:
>
> Please note that this survey is _not_ meant to be a vote about the
> proposal. It is to
> determine if we should actually have a refinement/vote on instantiating
> such a
> community committee - depending on the community's point of view.
>
