[packman] ffmpeg not in monolithic repository

[todd rme]

On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 3:15 AM, İsmail Dönmez <idoenmez at suse.de> wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 06, 2011 09:14:06 AM todd rme wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 2:09 AM, İsmail Dönmez <idoenmez at suse.de> wrote:
>> > Michael ATM just does blind merges and reverts them later on, I wouldn't
>> > call that the most stable thing.
>>
>> So you don't disagree with his statement that the ffmpeg version have
>> more features and the ffmpeg developers are fixing bugs present in the
>> libav version?  I don't see you disagreeing with Michael's assessment
>> of the technical state of the two projects.  If you don't disagree,
>> then that means that ffmpeg currently is the better choice from a user
>> experience standpoint.  And as I said, I think it is better to use the
>> version that provides a better user experience.
>
> Blindly merging won't give you a better software.

Are you saying Michael was lying when he said he was fixing bugs in
the merges, fixes that libav does not have?  If not then it obviously
isn't blind, he is checking them as he goes.

>> > He is just trying to make use of libav developers'
>> > free work.
>>
>> Yes, and packman, in turn, is trying to make use of the free work of
>> dozens of projects.  Isn't that how open-source is supposed to work?
>> No on is stopping the libav developers from using patches from ffmpeg.
>
> Packman doesn't go out and thrash free software developers' work.

Sorry, I don't know what "thrash" means in this context.  Can you
please elaborate?

> Btw libav
> cherry picks from FFmpeg's tree anyway, its not automated, done by hand as it
> should be. So your point about FFmpeg being better is wrong.

Are you saying Michael was lying when he said that ffmpeg has features
and bug fixes that libav does not have, while libav doesn't have any
features not present in ffmpeg?

-Todd