[mythtv] Many Myth Patches....

Sid Boyce sboyce at blueyonder.co.uk
Sun Jan 20 07:50:24 UTC 2008


Johan van der kolk wrote:
> Although many of the "patches" are related to the use of softcams etc and
> therefore not directly cover a shortfall in mythtv, it looks a bit arrogant
> to in advance classify them as dubious. There might be some value in them,
> and should not be thrown aside as dubious, or as another member mentioned,
> let them post these issues as bugs, and we'll look at them.
> 
> This is not the attitude that the developer of vdr has, and is one of the
> strong points of vdr.
> 
> Johan
> 
> 

Whatever their merit, it's unrealistic to expect myth developers to 
scour the internet, analyse and integrate patches into their development 
tree when the authors of these patches could quite well do that job 
themselves. There must be a reason why they don't want their work to be 
a part of the main development - perhaps the goal is to eventually 
create a fork. They must know how to submit patches to myth. Why don't they?
Try to imagine myth developers' time that would be taken up and away 
from their main task, scanning an outside patch source, integrating  and 
testing them, plus trying to keep up with the follow-up patches.
Common sense and practicality, not arrogance.
Regards
Sid.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mythtv-dev-bounces at mythtv.org [mailto:mythtv-dev-bounces at mythtv.org]
> On Behalf Of Justin Hornsby
> Sent: 2008-01-19 19:18
> To: Development of mythtv
> Subject: Re: [mythtv] Many Myth Patches....
> 
>> Jochen Kühner wrote:
>>> If anyone not knows: On
>>>
>>> http://dvbn.happysat.org/viewtopic.php?t=40505&postdays=0&postorder=asc&st
> art=0
>>> are many myth patches, most of them for dishnet, but maybe some of them
>>> are interesting for all myth users.
>>> There are patches for scanning, h264, ....
>>>
>> Hmmm.  Patches of a dubious nature on a forum you need to be a member of
>> to see.  Not looking good so far...
> 
>> Justin
> 
> 
> Although many of the "patches" are related to the use of softcams etc and
> therefore not directly cover a shortfall in mythtv, it looks a bit arrogant
> to in advance classify them as dubious. There might be some value in them,
> and should not be thrown aside as dubious, or as another member mentioned,
> let them post these issues as bugs, and we'll look at them.
> 
> This is not the attitude that the developer of vdr has, and is one of the
> strong points of vdr. If mythtv (read its developers) is intending to stay
> where it is right now, I would suggest that you consider also these types of
> "patches", even if only to see if these guys were smarter in some area's
> then the "official" coders.
> They know that many of the things they developed would only be considered
> feature requests, and most likely don’t have the patience to wait. It does
> not make them dubious or less skilled. Although they could have sent their
> "patches" up to the trac, so all users could benefit and not only those
> subscribed to that forum.
> 
> But thanks for a very nice and slick and crashfree product anyway guys !
> 
> Johan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________
> mythtv-dev mailing list
> mythtv-dev at mythtv.org
> http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-dev mailing list
> mythtv-dev at mythtv.org
> http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-dev
> 
> 


-- 
Sid Boyce ... Hamradio License G3VBV, Licensed Private Pilot
Emeritus IBM/Amdahl Mainframes and Sun/Fujitsu Servers Tech Support 
Specialist, Cricket Coach
Microsoft Windows Free Zone - Linux used for all Computing Tasks



More information about the mythtv-dev mailing list