[vlc-devel] [PATCH 12/13] vout/opengl: add a new API to configure fragment shaders

Filip Roséen filip at atch.se
Wed Dec 14 00:21:53 CET 2016

Hi again,

For starters I want to point out that the line-wrapping, and overall
formatting, of the email in which this email is a reply looks fine. If
you keep this up I believe there will be far less comments regarding
your formatting.

On 2016-12-13 23:44, Wilawar wrote:

> I hope everyone is reading the version into which the editor of FastMail
> didn’t insert additional line breaks – apparently I broke threading when
> sending it, but it should be easy to find; unfortunately, I see no way
> to add a 'References' tag (which I’ve seen being used on other lists)
> to my mail, with which I could link the other one back in.
> I also haven’t found a way to get a preview of the mail as it will be
> sent, as sending it to me will render me unable to edit it afterwards,
> copying the text into a new mail opens up new possibilities to fail.
> > all I see are consistently formatted emails
> > that has not received any complaint about readability.

> Ok, maybe my point is so obvious that you just don’t see it.


> >> After the topic had been raised, I’ve explicitly looked for
> >> formatting differences when I went through new messages on this
> >> list. I’ve noticed only two obvious differences: First, that many of
> >> you seem to end your lines either at around 80 or at around 72
> >> characters (as defined in some old advice) and second, that you seem
> >> to introduce many small paragraphs for no apparent reason.
> > I think the above speaks for itself.
> How?

That many of them, quote, *"seem to end your lines either at around 80
or at around 72"*. Given that we talk about formatting, and at many
times the length of lines, I certainly see relevance in the quoted

> > I have been telling you to look at other mails on the mailing-list
> > given that these have not received the same sort of feedback as the
> > ones you are sending.
> I’ve been telling you that it was no use for me to do that.

I understand that now, and I guess my attempt of providing examples of
how others reply to `vlc-devel` was a failure.
> > Unwilling to give you information?
> You missed a 'more' and apparently, after that, just desynced.

I do not understand what you are referring to, but I guess it does not

> > It is not an old habit, mailing-lists in general follow the same
> > (sometimes unwritten) guidelines as the one we have on `vlc-devel`,
> > for several different reasons.
> > 
> > One of them being that since many of the messages on `vlc-devel`
> > contains patches, `monospace` rendering are used consistently (which
> > is the major problem with the formatting you are sending your emails
> > as).
> > 
> > If you would like to have an alternative view of the message you are
> > sending, do what I do and send both `text/plain` and `text/html` (or
> > whatever it is that you prefer). Please, do not expect clients to
> > render `text/plain` with a proportional font (as you recently implied
> > on IRC).
> You did not address the issue of line length at all nor have you, through
> this whole conversation, managed to give me a positive instruction on
> which to use; for this mail, I have tried wrapping at 72, as this seems
> to be what you want. (!?) I find it hard to read, whatever.

I have, and as you yourself have observed there is no *exact* limit to
the length of lines, but most would agree that extensively long lines
does not aid readability.

> As I already said on IRC but want to preserve for public record here:
> You could have told me at some point that I should optimize my
> mails for monospace rendering, yet that point never came up – quite
> weird for something you consider _the major issue_, don’t you think?

I think my point is not coming across, and the above is a very passive
aggressive way of getting *your* point across. It reminds me of many
time in the past where I have tried to be of help, but what I get back
is that I have not explained something in a manner that you could
comprehend, and given the confusion that followed; it is my fault.

I *try* to be helpful, but there I cannot read your mind.
> On IRC, he replied with something along the lines of 'You should have
> known that not everybody is using the same proportional font you use',
> which is a straight strawman, as I never even implied that you all do.

For readers of this thread, in the above *"me"* refers to me, `refp`.
I guess it should be *"he"*, so it's probably just a silly typo.

> It also doesn’t explain why he didn’t just make this explicit – on the
> one hand, he said he had believed I had already known this, on the other,
> I obviously didn’t. What!?

I imagine the above being very hard to follow for someone who was not
active in `#videolan @ freenode` at the time where that discussion
took place.

When talking about line-wrapping, you brought up the fact that it
would render in a more correct manner for people using a proportional
font, like you do.

    22:01:27  Wilawar$ Also, using a proportional font helps, I’m
                       using one myself

To which I replied that most active people on `vlc-devel` uses a
monospace font (given that there are a lot of code nested within
comments, which means monospace yields better readability).

We then had the below exchange, where I tried to explain why I have
not explicitly mentioned the family of font used:

		22:21:31  Wilawar$ If this is the major problem, how come you only mention
                       it now and haven’t mentioned it ever before?


		22:22:56  refp$ Wilawar: because I 1) thought you knew about it 2) did not
										expect everything to use the same proportional font as you
										when rendering emails 3) it is a direct reply to your
										wording pretty much saying that there's no argument for
                    wrapping at XX characters

> The hint about sending plaintext and HTML versions is useful, at least –
> I assumed it was a deprecated approach that shouldn’t be used.
> Although I would still have to make sure that the plaintext rendering is
> OK, so there is not that much value in it for me …

As previously, I am trying to be helpful.

> > It is not limited to insertions of empty lines, but that could
> > certainly help in some of the scenarios.
> I merely don’t know more than that you are inserting lots of empty lines
> even after small breaks; you missed a chance to tell me _why_ you are
> doing this, to enable me to make informed decisions you can agree with
> by myself, in the future.

Because I find it more readable.

I have (up until the point of your email) not received any complaints
about it. If my way of writing is hard to follow, and/or confusing, I
will be happy to adjust it so that it follows community praxis.

> > I will let someone else reply to this part given that you are now
> > implying (over IRC) that my opinion is one of a kind, and that no one
> > besides me see the issues I've previously described.
> For the record, I did not do that (and it’s not the first time you
> accuse me of this) and it even somewhat contradicts the very citation
> you are replying to.

I stand by my point, but got nothing to add to it.

Best Regards,\
Filip Roséen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/vlc-devel/attachments/20161214/b8c99dad/attachment.html>

More information about the vlc-devel mailing list