[vlc-devel] [PATCH] coreaudio: fix deadlock on interruption
robux4 at gmail.com
Wed Dec 13 08:27:02 CET 2017
On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 9:50 PM, Rémi Denis-Courmont <remi at remlab.net> wrote:
> Le tiistaina 12. joulukuuta 2017, 18.50.22 EET Carola Nitz a écrit :
>> So correct me if I’m wrong, but we both want to spent less time on reviews
>> here and do it right correct ? To avoid another “obviously wrong patch”,
>> (wasting my time in creating it and yours in reviewing it) would it be
>> possible that you could just tell me how to do it instead ?
> Probably for the past ten years in a row, I have been writing the most
> technical content (cumulating documentation, commit messages and code
> reviews). I have neither motivation nor time to write even more - even less
> now that I noticed the propensity to ignore or skip more detailed explanations
> and documentations more.
> The VLC specifics involved in this specific patch series are actually well
> documented. Unlike many other VLC subsystems I wrote the effing documentation.
> I should not have had to re-explain those details again. The rest is generic C
> language. As for the circular buffer issue, it is not only a generic C issue,
> but I have *already* highlighted it on this very mailing list... so this makes
While I think it's fair not to have the same conversation to solve the
same problems over and over, I don't think it's fair to refer to a 9
years old thread and assume everyone should have read it. Was that
even VLC 1.0 at the time ? The code certainly has changed and improved
in the meantime as well as tools available from the language and OS.
> a great example of how explaining things ends up a waste of my time.
> Besides, the goal of the review is to sort out what can/should be merged, not
> to solve the problems of the reviewee. Plus, as far as I am aware, usage of my
> time is discretionary.
> Those are my views and I am well aware that the last sentence clashes with the
> mainstream open-source guidelines for code review or more generally dealing
> with new or less experienced community members.
> Those guidelines are solely focused on attracting more people. They fail to
> address the issues of reviewer burn-out and how time spent in review or
> training is not spent on design, development and debugging. It is high time
> that the open-source community adopts more pragmatic guidelines, whereby the
> finite availability of qualified human resources (time, motivation) is taken
> into serious consideration.
> tl;dr: I will only give explanations when I see fit, and I increasingly rarely
> see fit.
> vlc-devel mailing list
> To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options:
More information about the vlc-devel