Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The FFmpeg vs. Libav War Continues In Debian Land

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    Originally posted by prodigy_ View Post
    It was never justified. When it started it was 50% "look at me I'm the newest drama queen!" and 50% pure unabashed anti-ffmpeg trolling. And Libav developers have never even pretended to be constructive. I don't know what Debian maintainers smoked on the day they decided to scratch ffmpeg in favor of this abomination but it sure was powerful stuff.
    Everything is not black or white.
    If half the amount of developpers of a project decide to fork because they don't agree with the way it is managed, this is justified, whether you like it or not. That's how free software works and its not unealthy if it's done properly.
    The thing is that it has not be done properly and at the same time, ffmpeg management seems to have evolved for the better.

    As for the Debian packaging, obviously the packager at the time was involved in libav, so there is probably the reason for the change. At that time, his decision may have had merit.
    But in the light of how the two projects evolved since then, this decision should be questioned honestly IMHO.

    Comment


    • #42
      Originally posted by iive View Post
      I have no idea where you have gotten your impressions, but what you've written is simply not true. ...

      A lot of the fork supporters wanted change. And after the fork FFmpeg changed drastically ...
      Perhaps you do not want it to be true. Nevertheless it is and you even seem to be wanting to confirm it. Maybe you are sensitive to the drama and it has made you biased.

      I see myself as more or less unbiased. I was never a part of the fight. I favour libav, because they wanted change and they made it happen. To believe that it could have gone the other way is irrelevant to me. Nobody cares about all the things that could have been if only. What matters is what people made happen, because nothing will happen when people only argue and fight.

      It is a win for the majority. The libav people can do what they want, the ffmpeg people can do what they want, and the distributions and the users get a choice. I could take issues with ffmpeg in how they are trying to undermine libav, but if this is what drives them then so be it. My opinion would not change anything anyway. This is why I already said to stay sceptic, but also find it interesting. Anyone who wants for the other side to go away or to stop doing what they are doing or only to dictate what they should be doing is, quite frankly, an idiot.

      Comment


      • #43
        Originally posted by sdack View Post
        It is a win for the majority. The libav people can do what they want, the ffmpeg people can do what they want, and the distributions and the users get a choice. I could take issues with ffmpeg in how they are trying to undermine libav, but if this is what drives them then so be it.
        For an unbiased gentleman, you seem to have a fairly one-sided view on this matter.

        Users have not won a lot from this separation. As a ffmpeg user, I've kept using it as I have done for about 10 years. I saw new features got in, as it has always been so, and there's no way to tell if they got in faster now than before the fight. I had no incentive at all to move to libav as I could have done since Slackware do not provide any of them and so I compile it myself. In fact, I may be in this situation because ffmpeg ported libav features while adding new ones. libav users may not have been so lucky as the contrary have not been true. So in the end, as a user, I had every reason to stick to ffmpeg.

        Developers outside both projects only got more work because of this situation, not more choice, and the main reason for that is that libav never presented themselves as a true fork that could have lived alongside ffmpeg on the same system. That means that distributions had to install one or the other, and thus, applications have to be compatible with both if they wanted to run on all distros. As far as I have read, the libav project is entirely responsible for this mess and have done nothing to fix it. The ffmpeg project seems to have done the work to make sure both could be installed alongside nicely and reading the Debian comments on the bug, you'll see that's one of the main concerns.

        In the end, the only difference it really made is for both project developpers. As I said, it is a valid enough reason to fork in my opinion. But libav guys should have from the begining presented themselves as such and put as much distance from ffmpeg as possible, to avoid confusion. They in fact fed the confusion as much as they could, as the "ffmpeg is deprecated" message in the debian libav package shows.
        I also recall well enough the way they threatened legal action against the ffmpeg project for the use of the pre-fork ffmpeg logo.

        If a project has tried to undermine the other, it's certainly libav more than ffmpeg.

        Comment


        • #44
          Originally posted by rvdboom View Post
          For an unbiased gentleman, you seem to have a fairly one-sided view on this matter.
          No, but you do. Open source is about having the freedom to do what one wants to do. You only care for yourself, but not for all of the people involved. You are still stuck in thinking that the fork was bad. If so then open source must be bad. Try to get your angle right. Only when people feel free to do whatever they want to do can everyone profit. You do not want to go back to the age of Pharaohs, who built truly great monuments ... on the back of slaves.

          Comment


          • #45
            Originally posted by sdack View Post
            No, but you do. Open source is about having the freedom to do what one wants to do. You only care for yourself, but not for all of the people involved. You are still stuck in thinking that the fork was bad. If so then open source must be bad. Try to get your angle right. Only when people feel free to do whatever they want to do can everyone profit. You do not want to go back to the age of Pharaohs, who built truly great monuments ... on the back of slaves.
            I 'm not the one to claim I'm not biased. In fact, I probably am, since I use and have been using ffmpeg for about 10 years. But at least I'm not trying to talk generalities / ideology and try to address facts.

            Read again my post : I'm not saying forking is bad, I'm even saying forking has merits. But I'm saying this one was badly done. And I have made arguments and given what I believe to be facts to support it.
            Arguments and facts you obviously don't want to discuss, prefering to put out all this Pharaos, slaves and "open source must be bad" nonsense. I'm old enough in life and in Linux not to be impressed by such ideologic crap.

            After having extensively talked about what users and ffmpeg-based developers might have won from this fork, I find it funny that you're telling me I'm only caring about myself. Without, as usual, any real argument to support the claim.
            But you probably believe that I just want libav to disappear, I guess. Well, sorry, in fact, I don't mind. If it had become so much better than ffmpeg, I would have switched to it. And I still might do it in the future if this occurs.
            The fact (again) is that, as a user, it has not, so I stick to ffmpeg for now.

            But even though choice is good, that does not mean that all behaviours are acceptable. And, again, from what I've seen, libav start was rather ugly and their general attitude counter-productive.

            Comment


            • #46
              Originally posted by rvdboom View Post
              because they don't agree with the way it is managed
              Like I said, a classic case of drama queen syndrome.

              Originally posted by rvdboom View Post
              this is justified, whether you like it or not.
              Sorry, but I disagree. Whether you like it or not.

              Comment


              • #47
                Originally posted by rvdboom View Post
                ... I find it funny that you're telling me I'm only caring about myself. Without, as usual, any real argument to support the claim. ...

                And, again, from what I've seen, libav start was rather ugly and their general attitude counter-productive.
                You want proof? Take your response. It is a complaint. What is it you complain about? It is about you wanting me to share your opinion. It is not about people writing open software, making use of openness and doing what they believe they need to do. This proves it is about you.

                I cannot share your opinion, because it is one sided. The libav people left and started their own. What more could you possibly want of people who do not like to work with you and who want to do it their way?

                Your arguing is ideological crap, because you argue over what others should have or could have done instead of following their free will. Unless of course you want your point to be that free will is ideological crap.

                Comment


                • #48
                  Originally posted by sdack View Post
                  It is a win for the majority. The libav people can do what they want, the ffmpeg people can do what they want, and the distributions and the users get a choice. I could take issues with ffmpeg in how they are trying to undermine libav, but if this is what drives them then so be it.
                  ffmpeg is not trying to undermine libav: look at the debian-devel thread where they are trying the best they can to package ffmpeg in a way that it doesn't hurt the libav project. This is not a "replacement" package, it's a tremendous effort in allowing both to coexist.

                  On the other hand, look at the attitude of the current debian/libav packager trying to object to it (see http://lists.alioth.debian.org/piper...ly/039822.html) even though it doesn't really affect his pet project. So we basically can't say the same about the libav project which is actually trying to undermine ffmpeg on its own way.

                  Comment


                  • #49
                    Originally posted by prodigy_ View Post
                    Like I said, a classic case of drama queen syndrome.
                    Have you ever worked for project managed in a way that dosn't work for you? As a volunteer?
                    I have and I understand that at some point, it may just not work for you anymore and that you need to find another environment.
                    In open source, I find it a legit reason to fork, and not always a "drama queen syndrome".
                    But the way you handle the fork is another matter and in that case, it was pretty badly handled.

                    Sorry, but I disagree. Whether you like it or not.
                    That's perfectly your right.

                    Comment


                    • #50
                      Originally posted by sdack View Post
                      You want proof? Take your response. It is a complaint. What is it you complain about? It is about you wanting me to share your opinion. It is not about people writing open software, making use of openness and doing what they believe they need to do. This proves it is about you.
                      You're quite full of empty sentences. I don't mind your opinion in the slightest. You started posting in this thread making claims about the ffmpeg project attitude ("undermine libav") and about your pseudo unbiased attitude and I decided to refute your windbag song without any substance with some information I consider facts and with arguments. Not for you but for other readers who may be more interested in having a roughly informed point of view than cosmic sentences.
                      I don't expect to change your opinion and in truth, I'm not interested in it.

                      Originally posted by sdack View Post
                      I cannot share your opinion, because it is one sided. The libav people left and started their own. What more could you possibly want of people who do not like to work with you and who want to do it their way?
                      They can do it alright, as long as :

                      - They don't claim that my work is obsolete and their new work is going to replace it
                      - They don't take ownership (at least in words) of all the work I've done that they've taken with them
                      - They don't try to take with them the logo my project have been using for years to use it for their own (even if they're legally right to do so)
                      - They make a lot of effort to make sure my project is discarded by distros in favour of their own
                      - They avoid making any effort so that both our project can be installed alongside on the same system

                      If they do that, I'll consider they have bad ethics. They should just make sure that their project is superior.

                      Originally posted by sdack View Post
                      Your arguing is ideological crap, because you argue over what others should have or could have done instead of following their free will. Unless of course you want your point to be that free will is ideological crap.
                      I'm factual, you're ideological. I'm talking execution, you're talking ideals.
                      I'll say it one last time :the libav guys may have had good reasons to fork ffmpeg and they were right to do so if they couldn't work with the ffmpeg maintainer anymore. But the way they did it was wrong. And the reasons, in my opinion, are explained above and in my previous posts.

                      OK, I made my point, enough of this.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X