Will libav succeed ffmpeg?

Anthony Bentley · 2011-04-05 02:30:07

mundane wrote:

Whether Michael was a good leader or not is rather subjective. Only if you are intimately involved with the project can you really be in a position to comment.

mundane wrote:

… and the "evidence" you gave was a posting by one of the members of the forking side, who _obviously_ are going to be saying bad things about Michael...

These statements are contradictory…the only important opinions are those intimately involved, except the forkers (who were obviously intimately involved) because they’re biased? Have you never considered that maybe the side defending Niedermayer is biased as well?

I’m no expert on the situation, but it seems to me that if eighteen core developers wanted to fork, it’s possible that Niedermayer wasn’t doing the best job maintaining the project.

Trieforce wrote:

Let me explain it for you from the point of dark side. I remember it like if it was 1 year ago!
Michael Niedermayer maintainer make it so bad that ANY thing should be accepted PERSONALLY by him and ffmpeg is not a little unpopular project. So to include simple bug fixes developers were condemned to weight months... to simply correct the grammar error in text output. People didn't liked. The only secret is why didn't they just fork it from the start.

This basically matches what Jason Garrett‐Glaser (a libav maintainer) said on the subject.

schivmeister · 2011-04-05 07:26:05

Trieforce wrote:

Basically it is the same story as with mplayer2. I think for now would be good to replace ffmpeg.
http://libav.org/

As with including any kind of software, there needs to be reason, there needs to be purpose, and most importantly, there needs to be a general consensus. If, in the future, sooner or later, libav does stand out as being not only _a_ fork but _the_ fork, then sure, we might "replace" ffmpeg. It's called Pragmatism, and is not based on any single opinion or ideal.

My personal opinion: I don't see mplayer2 replacing mplayer anytime soon. I don't see libav replacing ffmpeg for a long time.

mundane · 2011-04-05 08:12:15

Anthony Bentley wrote:

mundane wrote:
Whether Michael was a good leader or not is rather subjective. Only if you are intimately involved with the project can you really be in a position to comment.
mundane wrote:
… and the "evidence" you gave was a posting by one of the members of the forking side, who _obviously_ are going to be saying bad things about Michael...
These statements are contradictory…the only important opinions are those intimately involved, except the forkers (who were obviously intimately involved) because they’re biased? Have you never considered that maybe the side defending Niedermayer is biased as well?
I’m no expert on the situation, but it seems to me that if eighteen core developers wanted to fork, it’s possible that Niedermayer wasn’t doing the best job maintaining the project.

I don't see a contradiction. I didn't say that Michael was not biased, nor did I say that Michael was not blameless. Please read more carefully

Both sides are probably very biased, that's true. But what we can gain from reading the ML is very subjective. I should mention that not all of the 18 were especially against Michael, and at least one has apologised and regrets their actions [1]. On the other hand, it is pretty evident that the forking side attempted something that was below the belt, and is probably against Trademark laws (though IANAL). Michael has openly admitted some of his mistakes [2] and at least has shown some degree of willingness to change (but whether he will or not is another debate).

On one side a bad leader, on the other side a group of people who attempted a dastardly takeover of the project and trademark instead of simply forking. I'd go with the bad leader any day. Of course, most people couldn't care less, and just want the project with the better software. For me though, I am in principle opposed to any group making such a move. It's just not what open source is about.

[1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.vid … vel/124122
[2] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.vid … vel/124144

Last edited by mundane (2011-04-05 08:15:25)

skottish · 2011-04-06 01:11:24

General discussion on how people feel about the breakup really belongs in the other thread:

https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=115295

Arch Discussion is about the direction of Arch. I would have closed this thread already if I still had the power. Really... Mods... I would have...

ewaller · 2011-04-06 01:24:19

skottish wrote:

General discussion on how people feel about the breakup really belongs in the other thread:
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=115295
Arch Discussion is about the direction of Arch. I would have closed this thread already if I still had the power. Really... Mods... I would have...

Agreed
Closed

litemotiv · 2011-04-06 07:38:33

skottish wrote:

I would have closed this thread already if I still had the power. Really... Mods... I would have...

Ahh yes, the golden age, when people still knew to use the report button.

Arch Linux

#26 2011-04-05 02:30:07

Re: Will libav succeed ffmpeg?

#27 2011-04-05 07:26:05

Re: Will libav succeed ffmpeg?

#28 2011-04-05 08:12:15

Re: Will libav succeed ffmpeg?

#29 2011-04-06 01:11:24

Re: Will libav succeed ffmpeg?

#30 2011-04-06 01:24:19

Re: Will libav succeed ffmpeg?

#31 2011-04-06 07:38:33

Re: Will libav succeed ffmpeg?

Board footer