Quoting Marton Balint (2023-05-30 23:09:50)
>
>
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2023, Anton Khirnov wrote:
>
> > ---
> > libavfilter/graphparser.c | 537 +-
> > 1 file changed, 126 insertions(+), 411 deletions(-)
>
> This change makes error messages for parse failures less
On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 11:10 PM Marton Balint wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2023, Anton Khirnov wrote:
>
> > ---
> > libavfilter/graphparser.c | 537 +-
> > 1 file changed, 126 insertions(+), 411 deletions(-)
>
> This change makes error messages for parse
On Fri, 20 Jan 2023, Anton Khirnov wrote:
---
libavfilter/graphparser.c | 537 +-
1 file changed, 126 insertions(+), 411 deletions(-)
This change makes error messages for parse failures less useful or
completely missing. E.g.:
ffmpeg -f lavfi -i
James Almer (12023-01-23):
> What's the difference between a RFC and a "I have this idea, what do you
> think of this mock up?" email? That if suggestions are made to improve or
> change said approach, then at worst what happens is that the writer wasted
> /his/ time writing 30k lines of which a
On 1/20/23, Nicolas George wrote:
> Nicolas George (12023-01-20):
>> - Writing a large patch for a part of the code you know well or for a
>> new feature is fine, of course.
>
> In fact, even for code we know well, we should consult, as long as we
> are not the only one who knows it well: as
On 1/20/2023 6:39 PM, Nicolas George wrote:
Nicolas George (12023-01-20):
- Writing a large patch for a part of the code you know well or for a
new feature is fine, of course.
In fact, even for code we know well, we should consult, as long as we
are not the only one who knows it well: as
Quoting Nicolas George (2023-01-20 21:47:16)
> Anton Khirnov (12023-01-20):
> > ---
> > libavfilter/graphparser.c | 537 +-
> > 1 file changed, 126 insertions(+), 411 deletions(-)
>
> I notice you removed the "RFC" from the subject line,
That means I now
Nicolas George (12023-01-20):
> - Writing a large patch for a part of the code you know well or for a
> new feature is fine, of course.
In fact, even for code we know well, we should consult, as long as we
are not the only one who knows it well: as long as other developers
might also have plans
Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12023-01-20):
> First, maintainer does not mean owner
No. But maintainer means person who knows the code very well.
> Then, also, in the same email you say "I have no time" and "you should
> consult with me before". Those are contradictory.
This is not contradictory. I
On Fri, 20 Jan 2023, at 21:47, Nicolas George wrote:
> have comments. I need some time, my time is very limited these days.
>
> By the way, I am baffled that you would write a 30k+ patch on code you
> do not maintain and do not know well without consulting the maintainer
> who knows it.
First,
Anton Khirnov (12023-01-20):
> ---
> libavfilter/graphparser.c | 537 +-
> 1 file changed, 126 insertions(+), 411 deletions(-)
I notice you removed the "RFC" from the subject line, but I probably
have comments. I need some time, my time is very limited these
---
libavfilter/graphparser.c | 537 +-
1 file changed, 126 insertions(+), 411 deletions(-)
diff --git a/libavfilter/graphparser.c b/libavfilter/graphparser.c
index ac6171e0c4..5db8b95a0c 100644
--- a/libavfilter/graphparser.c
+++ b/libavfilter/graphparser.c
12 matches
Mail list logo
