Why Debian returned to FFmpeg

Posted Jul 14, 2015 17:46 UTC (Tue) by flussence (guest, #85566)
Parent article: Why Debian returned to FFmpeg

> But, as Reinhard pointed out, there is a bit more to this story. Changes to libav are routinely merged into FFmpeg, but the flow of patches in the other direction is quite low.

It's been stated elsewhere that Libav takes just as much code from FFmpeg too - but they launder it through total rewrites so as to not give credit to the original authors and inflate their own numbers. This is consistent with the borderline-sociopathic mud-slinging they seem to do at every chance they get.

Why Debian returned to FFmpeg

Posted Jul 15, 2015 8:37 UTC (Wed) by dgm (subscriber, #49227) [Link] (1 responses)

Careful, some of the most prolific contributors to ffmpeg (Giovara, Storsjö, Khirnov and Cadhalpun are on the top list) are also libav contributors. Maybe you should be talking to them before saying such things.

Why Debian returned to FFmpeg

Posted Jul 15, 2015 22:17 UTC (Wed) by isilmendil (subscriber, #80522) [Link]

As far as I understand it, the contributors you listed are libav contributors, not ffmpeg ones. FFmpeg pulls in commits from libav whenever possible, so almost any libav contribution will automatically turn up in FFmpeg.

Why Debian returned to FFmpeg

Posted Jul 29, 2015 14:56 UTC (Wed) by lu_zero (guest, #72556) [Link] (1 responses)

This quite slandering statement clashes with the commit statistics touted in the article and maybe you might substantiate such wild accusation...

Every commit in Libav goes under review in the mailing list. At least for the patches that are not single-line fixes, it could take about 24 hours or more before a submission hits the tree.

On the other hand the Libav code gets "merged" in FFmpeg daily w/out any kind of review. The huge amount commits reported on the Michael side probably is inflated by the merge commits.

Why Debian returned to FFmpeg

Posted Jul 30, 2015 18:05 UTC (Thu) by flussence (guest, #85566) [Link]

If that rigid adherence to process had any correlation to delivering what users want, they wouldn't have spent years fighting to rid themselves of the libav nuisance. So in the end, it's worthless.