[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] News: Removal of libndi

Marton Balint cus at passwd.hu
Sun Mar 24 19:50:16 EET 2019



On Sat, 23 Mar 2019, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Mar 23, 2019 at 11:03 AM Thilo Borgmann <thilo.borgmann at mail.de>
> wrote:
>
>> Am 21.03.19 um 11:55 schrieb Michael Niedermayer:
>> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 05:41:31PM -0400, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 4:15 PM Gyan <ffmpeg at gyani.pro> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On 21-03-2019 01:32 AM, Marton Balint wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Wed, 20 Mar 2019, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> On Wed, 20 Mar 2019, at 20:52, Marton Balint wrote:
>> >>>>>> On Wed, 20 Mar 2019, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On Wed, 20 Mar 2019, at 19:34, Marton Balint wrote:
>> >>>>>>>> As I described in similar threads before, whether or not the
>> >>>>>> project want >> closed source support for NDI is a subjective issue,
>> >>>>>> please start a vote >> about the removal of libndi if you want to
>> >>>>>> seek this through.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> The removal of libndi is actually done and committed.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> That is just sad an unfair.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Sad, maybe.
>> >>>>> Unfair, I disagree. If NDI wants to be in, they know what to do.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> It is unfair towards the people who expressied disapproval, yet this
>> >>>> change was committed without neither vote nor consensus.
>> >>>
>> >>> +1. This was a political decision, not a technical one. A formal(-ish)
>> >>> survey should have happened on the ML.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> I agree we need a formal vote on this. I would like to set a wider
>> project
>> >> policy w.r.t. closed-source software integration, this is just one
>> instance
>> >> of a more general issue.
>>
>> > I think there should have been a vote before pushing a commit as there
>> where
>> > FFmpeg developers objecting to it.
>> > Ignoring people causes nothing good. Had there been a vote people would
>> be
>> > alot less upset about it as everyones oppinion would be counted equally
>> >
>> > It makes me unhappy that one FFmpeg developer apparently decided to leave
>> > the project already because of this.
>> > I think we should fix this, make a proper policy, with a proper vote
>> > and then hopefully noone feels the need to leave.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> >>
>> >> Who wants to organize it?
>> >
>> > Thilo organized the last vote, maybe he wants to do it ?
>> > but if noone else wants to do it i can do one too if people want and
>> > there is consensus who can vote
>> > If i search for "open source vote free" on google it points to
>> > vote.heliosvoting.org as first hit
>> > this seems rather basic but for simple yes/no questions it could work
>> > maybe someone has a better suggestion we could use for more complex
>> future
>> > cases that is multiple choice votes in teh future (schulze STV / CPO-STV
>> > for multiwinner or ScottishSTV (used by SPI), schulze method (used by
>> debian)
>> > for one winner of N choices would be nice to have)
>>
>> Including for simple yes/no votes we can use the same LimeSurvey host we
>> got provided from KDE for the survey. Also for anonymous votes.
>
>
> I think what we have to figure out is whether we want to ask:
>
> - do we want to keep (or remove) NDI?

I think this is definitely needed to justify the recent events.

>
> or
>
> - do we want to keep any components requiring linking with non-system,
> closed-source software? (this might or might not include blackmagic)
>
> or some other variant that also includes system software like nvidia stuff?
> Or ask a simple yes/no for each component separately? (Although that
> wouldn't set a more general policy.)

I prefer votes on a case by case basis, because it is hard to categorize 
closed source components. (ok, maybe not NDI, but for 
M264/Nvidia/Blackmagic it is definitely not trivial).

Regards,
Marton


More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list