Hacker News Reader

Comment by KingMob | Hacker News Reader

It's because the developer is misconstruing a non-technical decision they made as a technical limitation.

The commenters are trying to point this out, which misses the reality that the developer probably isn't going to budge from their requirement of universal support.

That dev's rationalization also sends a signal to any commenter with the technical chops to submit a PR, that it will probably be rejected for not supporting 100% of the codecs. I have no doubt people who could do it, over the years looked at that thread and concluded it would be a waste of their time.

View on HN

If someone really wanted to do it they will be contributing already continually and at some point start working on this with the expectation that they are the one maintaining it. And it would be fine because by then developers would already trust that person since they've been reliable.

It's not about "technical chops", it's about being constantly available, reliable person that shows to contribute day after day. If you don't do that why should a dev make the scope of their work bigger if they won't be able to keep putting the same quality of work?

> why should a dev make the scope of their work bigger if they won't be able to keep putting the same quality of work?

They shouldn't...but that's not at all what the primary developer said.

The issue is the primary dev seems to require reverse seek functionality to work with all codecs, and since some obscure codecs can't efficiently support it, they're not interested. Their challenge to others to submit a PR is counteracted by all the signs that they might provide a high-to-impossible barrier to approval.

It's not clear that even a trusted contributor would be able to sway this person's mind. Most likely, contributors either agree, or keep quiet on the issue if they disagree.

It's telling that there is no other VLC developer commenting in that thread - neither to support the decision and calm things down nor to go agains Remi's decree.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com