Live data from Hacker News

FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

code.ffmpeg.org

231–240 of 374 posts

Re: FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

#231

It's cool to see such an impactful project choose sovereignty. I hope more projects follow their example. If you're a backbone-of-the-internet project like FFmpeg is, living on GitHub seems horrible. You will be subjected to thousands of low quality pull requests and issues from people searching for typos to fix, adding a line of white space for a contrived reason, or similar nonsense changes. Just so they can put "F…

Is the version on Forgejo closed to public contribution?

Re: FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

#232
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you think this? It is the self hosted part that bothers you? I self host my code. If you can't bother creating an account or sending an email to share your contribution, I guess I'm quite fine not to have it. I'm sure ffmpeg don't need your contribution as well. I don't get this stance. Sending an email or creating an account is so low effort compared to any meaningful contribution. The friction is not inte…

I have contributed to a lot of open source projects for many years. They sure don't need my contribution, but if it were more accessible, I might actually contribute one day. Given that ffmpeg was apparently using mailing lists before (which I didn't know at the time of writing), this is obviously an improvement. But it's still a lot of friction, and it seems that it's friction for no particular reason. Hosting your…

Interesting how clueless but determined you were in your first comment. Maybe you should pause a bit and reconsider your whole outlook so you can advance with better success.

Humility is good tool more people should use it.

Re: FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

#233
It's interesting (and a little sad) how all git "forges" (for want of a better word) converge on the same layout. An alphabetical list of files, when they were last modified, and an expanded readme file.

IMO a list of recent commits would be more useful as a landing page, or maybe even just the readme. When checking out a new project, I'm interested in what it does, not in its folder structure when its LICENSE.md was last modified.

Re: FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

#234
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boomer means what now, anyone over 40?

anyone that is old and grumpy at internet (+ real life) neck beard balding would be pissed to me since I'am not being pedantic

That is the irony. Not sure how old are you but you are the one supporting "grumpy" (bitching about Forgejo) in this thread.

Re: FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

#235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thousands is quite the exaggeration when there are only 379 on ffmpeg github. If you look through them, its actually 5-10% if not less

Another way to frame this is that even though the FFmpeg repository clearly indicates it's a mirror repository and has had a single open pull request titled "WARNING: PULL REQUESTS ON THIS REPOSITORY ARE IGNORED" [0] sitting in the pull requests page for 10 years , they've still had to close hundreds of pull requests. [0] https://github.com/FFmpeg/FFmpeg/pull/153

That’s fair, but it would be trivial to use GitHub’s actions/API (and probably just an existing open source tool in either case) to automatically close them without anyone wasting their time.

I think you’re definitely right that being a massive project on GitHub that accepts PRs there would be a nightmare though.

Re: FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

#236

It's cool to see such an impactful project choose sovereignty. I hope more projects follow their example. If you're a backbone-of-the-internet project like FFmpeg is, living on GitHub seems horrible. You will be subjected to thousands of low quality pull requests and issues from people searching for typos to fix, adding a line of white space for a contrived reason, or similar nonsense changes. Just so they can put "F…

FFmpeg seems to have dealt with that problem when they still were on github. This is the paragraph at the end of the readme:

> Contributing

> Patches should be submitted to the ffmpeg-devel mailing list using git format-patch or git send-email. Github pull requests should be avoided because they are not part of our review process and will be ignored.

An agentic LLM bot is likely to have no problems at creating a patch and mailing it but it's a major pain for most human developers. Furthermore they can ban source email addresses and vet potential contributors before letting them in the mailing list.

Re: FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

#237
post #205
post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44886997#44928597

Oh, thanks, so it's even worse than I thought - it's an intentional degradation of user experience for financial benefit

I'm fond of it. Even if I was paying, I don't think I would change it.

Re: FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

#238

It's cool to see such an impactful project choose sovereignty. I hope more projects follow their example. If you're a backbone-of-the-internet project like FFmpeg is, living on GitHub seems horrible. You will be subjected to thousands of low quality pull requests and issues from people searching for typos to fix, adding a line of white space for a contrived reason, or similar nonsense changes. Just so they can put "F…

Rejecting useless or white space-only PRs is quick and easy. It’s not as big of a problem as you’re suggesting. I’ve gone through a few projects and updated the documentation as I explored the codebase. Reception ranges from thankful to people scorning me for attempting to make contributions that weren’t code changes. It’s frustrating when maintainers are more interested in keeping people out than in considering actu…

It’s all in the approach: start with a “thank you for the project”, and a “hope you don’t mind but I’ve corrected a few typos” and nobody will shout you down. Only go with a blank PR description and it’ll come across as arrogant and spammy.

Re: FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

#239
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's Anubis[0], an AI crawler blocker. [0]: https://github.com/TecharoHQ/anubis

s/AI crawler/non-Big Browser/

Every obscure browser I've thrown at it has passed except for Opera Mini because it doesn't support real Javascript. Compared to the alternatives (Cloudflare/Google RECAPTCHA), compatibility is great in my experience.

If you're one of those NoScript people you'll probably end up stuck unless site admins enable the meta refresh challenge. If it proves effective, that may get turned on by default in the future, though, which would solve that problem too.

Re: FFmpeg moves to Forgejo

#240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> yes, it's a cartoon character; get over it I think it's cute. It wouldn't be a problem if it wasn't cute. It's inoffensive and doesn't get in the way of the software serving its function, the only critique I could do if I wanted to is people unfamiliar with the project would get a bit confused if they only saw the character for a split second: https://anubis.techaro.lol/ I think even Cloudflare gives you a second o…

So wait, is the cartoon mascot at issue the Annubis one for the Cloudflare-like DDoS protection, or is it an actual FFmpeg mascot? Because I don't see any cartoon characters on the FFmpeg code, main, or wiki websites. But I am curious what kinda -tan they came up with. :P

It's the Anubis one, there are a few other drawings on the homepage of theirs.

It was pointed out elsewhere in the thread that they also sell an unbranded version for companies: https://anubis.techaro.lol/docs/admin/botstopper

Cool way to make money, to be honest!

Post reply on HN