On Thu, Nov 09, 2023 at 09:20:33AM +0100, Lynne wrote:
> Nov 7, 2023, 08:36 by d...@lynne.ee:
>
> > Oct 29, 2023, 06:57 by d...@lynne.ee:
> >
> >> Oct 29, 2023, 05:51 by mich...@niedermayer.cc:
> >>
> >>> On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 09:23:45PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
> >>>
> Oct 28, 2023, 18:49 by
On 2023-11-09 03:16 pm, epira...@gmail.com wrote:
If 6.1 will be cut from master, my tpad fix I sent yesterday should probably be
applied first
to prevent having a release with broken tpad.
The branch is already cut. Will need to be cherry-picked.
Regards,
Gyan
On 9 Nov 2023, at 9:20, Lynne wrote:
> Nov 7, 2023, 08:36 by d...@lynne.ee:
>
>> Oct 29, 2023, 06:57 by d...@lynne.ee:
>>
>>> Oct 29, 2023, 05:51 by mich...@niedermayer.cc:
>>>
On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 09:23:45PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
> Oct 28, 2023, 18:49 by mich...@niedermayer.cc:
Nov 7, 2023, 08:36 by d...@lynne.ee:
> Oct 29, 2023, 06:57 by d...@lynne.ee:
>
>> Oct 29, 2023, 05:51 by mich...@niedermayer.cc:
>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 09:23:45PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
>>>
Oct 28, 2023, 18:49 by mich...@niedermayer.cc:
> On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 06:04:41PM
Steven Liu 于2023年11月8日周三 09:26写道：
>
> Tristan Matthews 于2023年11月8日周三 00:47写道：
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 2:36 AM Lynne wrote:
> > >
> > > Oct 29, 2023, 06:57 by d...@lynne.ee:
> > >
> > > > Oct 29, 2023, 05:51 by mich...@niedermayer.cc:
> > > >
> > > >> On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 09:23:45PM
Tristan Matthews 于2023年11月8日周三 00:47写道：
>
> On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 2:36 AM Lynne wrote:
> >
> > Oct 29, 2023, 06:57 by d...@lynne.ee:
> >
> > > Oct 29, 2023, 05:51 by mich...@niedermayer.cc:
> > >
> > >> On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 09:23:45PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Oct 28, 2023, 18:49 by
On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 2:36 AM Lynne wrote:
>
> Oct 29, 2023, 06:57 by d...@lynne.ee:
>
> > Oct 29, 2023, 05:51 by mich...@niedermayer.cc:
> >
> >> On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 09:23:45PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
> >>
> >>> Oct 28, 2023, 18:49 by mich...@niedermayer.cc:
> >>>
> >>> > On Thu, Jul 06, 2023
Oct 29, 2023, 06:57 by d...@lynne.ee:
> Oct 29, 2023, 05:51 by mich...@niedermayer.cc:
>
>> On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 09:23:45PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
>>
>>> Oct 28, 2023, 18:49 by mich...@niedermayer.cc:
>>>
>>> > On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 06:04:41PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> It's been a while
Am 29.10.23 um 20:27 schrieb Jean-Baptiste Kempf:
On Sun, 29 Oct 2023, at 19:46, Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
Am 29.10.23 um 18:56 schrieb Jean-Baptiste Kempf:
On Sun, 29 Oct 2023, at 18:20, Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
In this case as well, I think you
should have
On Sun, 29 Oct 2023, at 19:46, Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> Am 29.10.23 um 18:56 schrieb Jean-Baptiste Kempf:
>> On Sun, 29 Oct 2023, at 18:20, Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
>>> In this case as well, I think you
>>> should have transported your reasoning back to this thread on
Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12023-10-29):
> IRC has logs
That are good to know what has been said, not for participating in the
decision making. Therefore IRC is unacceptable for making decisions.
> and many people having fixed work hours are on IRC.
The problem is the people who cannot be.
--
On Sun, 29 Oct 2023, at 19:31, Nicolas George wrote:
> Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12023-10-29):
>> We'll have to agree to disagree.
>
> So you disagree that ffmpeg is not a corporate project where developers
> can be forced to have fixed work hours. Interesting.
IRC has logs and many people having
Am 29.10.23 um 19:12 schrieb Nicolas George:
Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12023-10-29):
Sorry, I can. Being on IRC is necessary, IMHO.
Completely unacceptable and fortunately not true at all.
The mailing-list has always been the main channel of development,
anything synchronous, that requires people
Am 29.10.23 um 18:56 schrieb Jean-Baptiste Kempf:
On Sun, 29 Oct 2023, at 18:20, Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
In this case as well, I think you
should have transported your reasoning back to this thread on the ML -
It's actually in this very thread on the ML about the timing and
Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12023-10-29):
> We'll have to agree to disagree.
So you disagree that ffmpeg is not a corporate project where developers
can be forced to have fixed work hours. Interesting.
--
Nicolas George
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, 29 Oct 2023, at 19:12, Nicolas George wrote:
> Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12023-10-29):
>> Sorry, I can. Being on IRC is necessary, IMHO.
>
> Completely unacceptable and fortunately not true at all.
We'll have to agree to disagree.
--
Jean-Baptiste Kempf - President
+33 672 704 734
Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12023-10-29):
> Sorry, I can. Being on IRC is necessary, IMHO.
Completely unacceptable and fortunately not true at all.
The mailing-list has always been the main channel of development,
anything synchronous, that requires people to be on line at the same
time, is unsuited
On Sun, 29 Oct 2023, at 18:20, Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> In this case as well, I think you
> should have transported your reasoning back to this thread on the ML -
It's actually in this very thread on the ML about the timing and prefering 7.0
over 6.1.
I even send a longer
Am 29.10.23 um 17:25 schrieb Jean-Baptiste Kempf:
On Sun, 29 Oct 2023, at 16:10, Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
Where? I don't see you saying that in this thread.
If you said so at VDD, that's not many times.
Explained three times at VDD and several time on IRC.
Very well. Assuming
On Sun, 29 Oct 2023, at 17:49, James Almer wrote:
> On 10/29/2023 1:42 PM, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> On Sat, 28 Oct 2023, at 18:49, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>> noone mentioned 5.1.x and 6.0.x to me before
>>
>> Our last releases from our two major bracnhes, are a 5.1.3 (which
On 10/29/2023 1:42 PM, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
Hello,
On Sat, 28 Oct 2023, at 18:49, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
noone mentioned 5.1.x and 6.0.x to me before
Our last releases from our two major bracnhes, are a 5.1.3 (which is a LTS
branch) and a 6.0.0.
Both of those have not had
Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12023-10-29):
> Being not polite to someone is a personal attack.
No.
--
Nicolas George
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or
On Sun, 29 Oct 2023, at 17:40, Nicolas George wrote:
> Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12023-10-29):
>> Because instead of doing the polite and normal thing which would be:
>
> Politeness or not does not make it a personal attack. Moving goalposts
> much?
Being not polite to someone is a personal attack.
Hello,
On Sat, 28 Oct 2023, at 18:49, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> noone mentioned 5.1.x and 6.0.x to me before
Our last releases from our two major bracnhes, are a 5.1.3 (which is a LTS
branch) and a 6.0.0.
Both of those have not had backports and releases of all the security issues,
nor on
Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12023-10-29):
> Because instead of doing the polite and normal thing which would be:
Politeness or not does not make it a personal attack. Moving goalposts
much?
--
Nicolas George
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
On Sun, 29 Oct 2023, at 15:17, Nicolas George wrote:
> Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12023-10-29):
>> > Unsubstantiated opinion, let us ignore it.
>> Again, a personal attack, from you.
>
> YOU are not an OPINION, so, no, this is not a personal attack,
Because instead of doing the polite and normal thing
On Sun, 29 Oct 2023, at 16:10, Thilo Borgmann via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> Where? I don't see you saying that in this thread.
> If you said so at VDD, that's not many times.
Explained three times at VDD and several time on IRC.
> Not being at where you say s.th. does not imply anything and is not
Am 29.10.23 um 14:51 schrieb Jean-Baptiste Kempf:
On Sun, 29 Oct 2023, at 10:30, Nicolas George wrote:
Michael Niedermayer (12023-10-28):
It was just that jb told me
"6.1 opportunity is gone.
Unsubstantiated opinion, let us ignore it.
Not like your opinions that are always substantiated...
Jean-Baptiste Kempf (12023-10-29):
> > Unsubstantiated opinion, let us ignore it.
> Again, a personal attack, from you.
YOU are not an OPINION, so, no, this is not a personal attack, this is a
lie.
--
Nicolas George
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, 29 Oct 2023, at 10:30, Nicolas George wrote:
> Michael Niedermayer (12023-10-28):
>> It was just that jb told me
>> "6.1 opportunity is gone.
>
> Unsubstantiated opinion, let us ignore it.
Not like your opinions that are always substantiated...
Except I explain many times why the
Michael Niedermayer (12023-10-28):
> It was just that jb told me
> "6.1 opportunity is gone.
Unsubstantiated opinion, let us ignore it.
Regards,
--
Nicolas George
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
Oct 29, 2023, 05:51 by mich...@niedermayer.cc:
> On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 09:23:45PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
>
>> Oct 28, 2023, 18:49 by mich...@niedermayer.cc:
>>
>> > On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 06:04:41PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
>> >
>> >> It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
>> >> a
On Sat, Oct 28, 2023 at 09:23:45PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
> Oct 28, 2023, 18:49 by mich...@niedermayer.cc:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 06:04:41PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
> >
> >> It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
> >> a lot of new features in.
> >> We did say we would make
Oct 28, 2023, 18:49 by mich...@niedermayer.cc:
> On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 06:04:41PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
>
>> It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
>> a lot of new features in.
>> We did say we would make releases more often, and I think
>> it's about time we have a new
On 10/28/2023 1:49 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 06:04:41PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
a lot of new features in.
We did say we would make releases more often, and I think
it's about time we have a new release.
On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 06:04:41PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
> It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
> a lot of new features in.
> We did say we would make releases more often, and I think
> it's about time we have a new release.
>
> Anything anyone wants to have merged or should
On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 1:42 PM Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 05:37:42AM +0200, Lynne wrote:
> > Jul 6, 2023, 18:04 by d...@lynne.ee:
> >
> > > It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
> > > a lot of new features in.
> > > We did say we would make
On Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 05:37:42AM +0200, Lynne wrote:
> Jul 6, 2023, 18:04 by d...@lynne.ee:
>
> > It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
> > a lot of new features in.
> > We did say we would make releases more often, and I think
> > it's about time we have a new release.
> >
Jul 6, 2023, 18:04 by d...@lynne.ee:
> It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
> a lot of new features in.
> We did say we would make releases more often, and I think
> it's about time we have a new release.
>
> Anything anyone wants to have merged or should we branch
> off 6.1
On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 05:19:17PM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-10-03 21:22:58)
> > On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 08:14:37PM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> > > You keep framing this as some kind of a personal campaign against you.
> > > It is not. From my perspective,
This discussion has drifted far away from any topic set upfront.
It's gotten to the point where there's no way for anyone outside
to join and give their own opinion, as it's not possible to know the
entire discussion that's happened up to this point.
Hence, spin this off in multiple threads.
Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-10-03 21:22:58)
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 08:14:37PM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> > You keep framing this as some kind of a personal campaign against you.
> > It is not. From my perspective, the objections to SDR have been largely
> > technical, and most of the
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 08:14:37PM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-09-26 19:16:30)
> > On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 05:30:19PM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> > > Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-09-26 17:09:47)
> > > > On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 11:13:40AM +0200, Anton
Le torstaina 28. syyskuuta 2023, 19.43.57 EEST Nicolas George a écrit :
> Rémi Denis-Courmont (12023-09-28):
> > Calling BBB, Kieran and myself dishonest is.
>
> I call your arguments dishonest.
You almost had me doubting my recollection for a minute. But:
Michael wrote:
> > People did not ask
Rémi Denis-Courmont (12023-09-28):
> Calling BBB, Kieran and myself dishonest is.
I call your arguments dishonest.
> I take that as an admission of guilt.
Take it as you want.
--
Nicolas George
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
Rémi Denis-Courmont (12023-09-28):
> And this puts me in a bit of a conundrum. See, if you did figure that much
> out,
> then you would be willfully committing defamation against me, by calling me
> dishonest.
I am calling your argument dishonest. I stand by it.
>I suppose that I
Le torstaina 28. syyskuuta 2023, 19.41.06 EEST Nicolas George a écrit :
> (1) There was no violations in my message. Calling your arguments
> bullshit is not a personal attack, by definition.
Calling BBB, Kieran and myself dishonest is.
> (2) Even if there were any violation, there is nobody to
Rémi Denis-Courmont (12023-09-28):
> Literally the exact same verb even.
So what are you saying, that I noticed you moved the goalposts one
message too late?
> P.S.: Your repeated CoC violations will be reported shortly.
So, for your information:
(1) There was no violations in my message.
Le torstaina 28. syyskuuta 2023, 19.32.44 EEST Nicolas George a écrit :
> Rémi Denis-Courmont (12023-09-28):
> > Err, it is very much an issue w.r.t. "catching on".
>
> Moving the goalpost much.
I think obviously not, considering the original quote (EMPHASIS ADDED):
> In fact, the SDR code has
On 9/28/23, Nicolas George wrote:
> Rémi Denis-Courmont (12023-09-28):
>> Err, it is very much an issue w.r.t. "catching on".
>
> Moving the goalpost much.
>
>> Also that's an ad hominem attack, which violates the CC.
>
> No it is not.
>
> This mail is no longer part of a honest discussion, and
Le torstaina 28. syyskuuta 2023, 19.13.37 EEST Nicolas George a écrit :
> Rémi Denis-Courmont (12023-09-28):
> > Thanks for making my point.
>
> Stealing the other person rhetoric device does not make you right.
>
> > That does not change the fact that it won't make it any popular, and thus
> >
Rémi Denis-Courmont (12023-09-28):
> Err, it is very much an issue w.r.t. "catching on".
Moving the goalpost much.
> Also that's an ad hominem attack, which violates the CC.
No it is not.
This mail is no longer part of a honest discussion, and therefore I will
save myself the time of answering
Le torstaina 28. syyskuuta 2023, 18.28.50 EEST Nicolas George a écrit :
> Rémi Denis-Courmont (12023-09-28):
> > You can repeat the contrary as much as you want, we do not believe that
> > your SDR code fits in FFmpeg. Why do you not understand this?
>
> We understand that very well. Once again,
Rémi Denis-Courmont (12023-09-28):
> Thanks for making my point.
Stealing the other person rhetoric device does not make you right.
> That does not change the fact that it won't make it any popular, and thus
> your
> postulate is wrong.
It reach more popular included in FFmpeg than if users
Le torstaina 28. syyskuuta 2023, 18.33.33 EEST Nicolas George a écrit :
> Rémi Denis-Courmont (12023-09-28):
> > Strange, I thought FFmpeg really became popular as a back-end library for
> > mplayer, before it was picked up by all other OSS multimedia at the time
> > (gstreamer, VLC, Xine, etc.).
Rémi Denis-Courmont (12023-09-28):
> Strange, I thought FFmpeg really became popular as a back-end library for
> mplayer, before it was picked up by all other OSS multimedia at the time
> (gstreamer, VLC, Xine, etc.).
Fortunately, I know the history of our projects better than you:
First,
Rémi Denis-Courmont (12023-09-28):
> You can repeat the contrary as much as you want, we do not believe that your
> SDR code fits in FFmpeg. Why do you not understand this?
We understand that very well. Once again, it is you who do not
understand something: your BELIEF that SDR does not belong
Le keskiviikkona 27. syyskuuta 2023, 23.27.40 EEST Nicolas George a écrit :
> Michael Niedermayer (12023-09-27):
> > With SDR they do ask for a seperate library.
>
> And they are being dishonest in that. Nothing successful starts as a
> library,
Strange, I thought FFmpeg really became popular as
Le keskiviikkona 27. syyskuuta 2023, 23.18.29 EEST Michael Niedermayer a écrit
:
> And you can repeat it as often as you want, iam not interrested.
> Why do you not understand this ?
You can repeat the contrary as much as you want, we do not believe that your
SDR code fits in FFmpeg. Why do you
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 10:27 PM Nicolas George wrote:
> Michael Niedermayer (12023-09-27):
> > With SDR they do ask for a seperate library.
>
> And they are being dishonest in that. Nothing successful starts as a
> library
>
Didn't dav1d start as a library? (Or maybe it's not very
Michael Niedermayer (12023-09-27):
> With SDR they do ask for a seperate library.
And they are being dishonest in that. Nothing successful starts as a
library, they start small and grow, and get turned into libraries once
multiple projects can use them.
Demanding you make a separate library and
On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 03:53:56PM +0200, Tomas Härdin wrote:
> tis 2023-09-26 klockan 19:16 +0200 skrev Michael Niedermayer:
>
> > Anyway, i appologize for announcing SDR in 6.1. I was too much in
> > love with
> > SDR and how cool it would be ...
>
> This is why I have suggested many times
tis 2023-09-26 klockan 19:16 +0200 skrev Michael Niedermayer:
> Anyway, i appologize for announcing SDR in 6.1. I was too much in
> love with
> SDR and how cool it would be ...
This is why I have suggested many times that you should get involved in
actual SDR projects. For example the FreeDV
Hi Michael,
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 7:16 PM Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
> Should i ask the counter-question ?
> are the developers who have less than 10 commits since 2017 abusing
> something
> by organizing and rallying the people against SDR, against the domain owner
> and against me ?
>
Vittorio Giovara (12023-09-26):
> This is not true.
If you say so.
--
Nicolas George
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe,
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 2:24 PM Nicolas George wrote:
> Anton Khirnov (12023-09-26):
> > It is not. From my perspective, the objections to SDR have been largely
> > technical
>
> We have not read the same discussion. The objections to SDR start and
> end at “it does not belong in FFmpeg”, which
Anton Khirnov (12023-09-26):
> It is not. From my perspective, the objections to SDR have been largely
> technical
We have not read the same discussion. The objections to SDR start and
end at “it does not belong in FFmpeg”, which is not a technical
objection but an aesthetic one.
Furthermore,
Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-09-26 19:16:30)
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 05:30:19PM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> > Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-09-26 17:09:47)
> > > On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 11:13:40AM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> > > > Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-09-22 11:27:54)
>
James Almer (12023-09-26):
> We don't want you to resign anything. We want a proper discussion in how to
> handle SDR, if at all. Pushing it in a form that everyone agrees is not
> ready for upstream is not a good idea.
We can agree on this, if we consider that the opinion on whether it is
ready
On 9/26/2023 2:16 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 05:30:19PM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-09-26 17:09:47)
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 11:13:40AM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-09-22 11:27:54)
The idea was
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 05:27:23PM +0100, Derek Buitenhuis wrote:
> On 9/26/2023 4:30 PM, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> > This is disingenuous sophistry, and honestly I find it insulting that
> > you expect people to swallow it.
>
> I have been pretty silent on list, but as one of the people who has
>
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 05:30:19PM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-09-26 17:09:47)
> > On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 11:13:40AM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> > > Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-09-22 11:27:54)
> > > > The idea was really just, that i said ill include
On 9/26/2023 4:30 PM, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> This is disingenuous sophistry, and honestly I find it insulting that
> you expect people to swallow it.
I have been pretty silent on list, but as one of the people who has
access to the Twitter account as a delegate (but who was locked out
at the time
Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-09-26 17:09:47)
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 11:13:40AM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> > Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-09-22 11:27:54)
> > > The idea was really just, that i said ill include SDR and i want to
> > > keep this word
> >
> > Well, you should not have
> Iam part of the community, i would think and for 99% of the tweets made
> on the official twitter account i have never been asked or even had a
> chance to comment before they where made. So what you suggest here is
> "the correct way", has never been applied.
Announcing feature are going to be
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 11:13:40AM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-09-22 11:27:54)
> > The idea was really just, that i said ill include SDR and i want to
> > keep this word
>
> Well, you should not have spoken for the entire project without
> consulting the rest
On 7/7/23 02:40, Lynne wrote:
May as well decide on a name in the meanwhile.
Anyone got any suggestions?
___
Has Thomson been used?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._J._Thomson
- Leo Izen
___
Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-09-22 11:27:54)
> The idea was really just, that i said ill include SDR and i want to
> keep this word
Well, you should not have spoken for the entire project without
consulting the rest of the community first. Nobody here is entitled to
decide unilaterally what
Yo,
On Fri, 22 Sep 2023, at 17:27, Paul B Mahol wrote:
>> about it because i did not know anyone else who knows perl and be willing
>> to help look into a not entirely trivial (for me) issue in fate server
>
> Do not lie, [...]
Calling people liars is not really fitting our Code of Conduct.
It's
On 9/22/23, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 11:32:27AM +0200, Paul B Mahol wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 11:28 AM Michael Niedermayer
>>
> [...]
>
>> If you mean real FFmpeg work, than by all means give access to services
>> only you have to other
>> interesting parties,
On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 11:32:27AM +0200, Paul B Mahol wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 11:28 AM Michael Niedermayer
[...]
> If you mean real FFmpeg work, than by all means give access to services
> only you have to other
> interesting parties, like security related reports and others.
what ?
On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 12:04 PM Nicolas George wrote:
> Michael Niedermayer (12023-09-22):
> > Now the SDR + blockings is solved by not including any SDR that the
> > community doesnt like in 6.1 but instead me simply making a seperate
> > release with SDR, or so i thought.
>
> I strongly
Michael Niedermayer (12023-09-22):
> Now the SDR + blockings is solved by not including any SDR that the
> community doesnt like in 6.1 but instead me simply making a seperate
> release with SDR, or so i thought.
I strongly suggest you just refuse to make any release that do not
include SDR. If
On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 11:28 AM Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 09, 2023 at 12:14:09PM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> > Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-07-07 17:06:54)
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 06:04:41PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
> > > > It's been a while since we've had
On Sun, Jul 09, 2023 at 12:14:09PM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-07-07 17:06:54)
> > Hi
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 06:04:41PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
> > > It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
> > > a lot of new features in.
> > > We did
Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2023-07-07 17:06:54)
> Hi
>
> On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 06:04:41PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
> > It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
> > a lot of new features in.
> > We did say we would make releases more often, and I think
> > it's about time we have
Quoting Lynne (2023-07-06 18:04:41)
> It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
> a lot of new features in.
> We did say we would make releases more often, and I think
> it's about time we have a new release.
>
> Anything anyone wants to have merged or should we branch
> off 6.1
On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 12:04 PM Lynne wrote:
>
> It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
> a lot of new features in.
> We did say we would make releases more often, and I think
> it's about time we have a new release.
>
> Anything anyone wants to have merged or should we branch
On Fri, Jul 07, 2023 at 05:33:32PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
> Jul 7, 2023, 17:07 by mich...@niedermayer.cc:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 06:04:41PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
> >
> >> It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
> >> a lot of new features in.
> >> We did say we
Jul 7, 2023, 17:07 by mich...@niedermayer.cc:
> Hi
>
> On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 06:04:41PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
>
>> It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
>> a lot of new features in.
>> We did say we would make releases more often, and I think
>> it's about time we have a new
Hi
On Thu, Jul 06, 2023 at 06:04:41PM +0200, Lynne wrote:
> It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
> a lot of new features in.
> We did say we would make releases more often, and I think
> it's about time we have a new release.
yes
>
> Anything anyone wants to have merged
Lynne 于2023年7月7日周五 14:40写道：
>
> Jul 6, 2023, 18:19 by j...@videolan.org:
>
> > Heya,
> >
> > On Thu, 6 Jul 2023, at 18:04, Lynne wrote:
> >
> >> It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
> >> a lot of new features in.
> >> We did say we would make releases more often, and I think
Leavitt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrietta_Swan_Leavitt
> On 7 Jul 2023, at 08:40, Lynne wrote:
>
> Jul 6, 2023, 18:19 by j...@videolan.org:
>
>> Heya,
>>
>> On Thu, 6 Jul 2023, at 18:04, Lynne wrote:
>>
>>> It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
>>> a lot of new
Jul 6, 2023, 18:19 by j...@videolan.org:
> Heya,
>
> On Thu, 6 Jul 2023, at 18:04, Lynne wrote:
>
>> It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
>> a lot of new features in.
>> We did say we would make releases more often, and I think
>> it's about time we have a new release.
>>
>
Heya,
On Thu, 6 Jul 2023, at 18:04, Lynne wrote:
> It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
> a lot of new features in.
> We did say we would make releases more often, and I think
> it's about time we have a new release.
It's a good idea.
> Anything anyone wants to have merged
It's been a while since we've had a release, and we've had
a lot of new features in.
We did say we would make releases more often, and I think
it's about time we have a new release.
Anything anyone wants to have merged or should we branch
off 6.1 in a few days?
96 matches
Mail list logo
