FFmpeg's bug/patch/feature request tracker manual
 =================================================

 NOTE: This is a draft.

 
 Overview:
 ---------

 FFmpeg uses Roundup for tracking issues, new issues and changes to

 existing issues can be done through a web interface and through email.

 It is possible to subscribe to individual issues by adding yourself to the

 nosy list or to subscribe to the ffmpeg-issues mailing list which receives

 a mail for every change to every issue. Replies to such mails will also

 be properly added to the respective issue.

 (the above does all work already after light testing)

 The subscription URL for the ffmpeg-issues list is:

 http://live.polito/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-issues

 The URL of the webinterface of the tracker is:

 http(s)://roundup.ffmpeg/roundup/ffmpeg/

 Note the URLs in this document are obfuscated, you must append the top level

 domain for non-profit organizations to the tracker, and of Italy to the
 mailing list.

 
 Email Interface:
 ----------------

 There is a mailing list to which all new issues and changes to existing issues
 are sent. You can subscribe through

 http://live.polito/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-issues
 Replies to messages there will have their text added to the specific issues.
 Attachments will be added as if they had been uploaded via the web interface.
 You can change the status, substatus, topic, ... by changing the subject in
 your reply like:
 Re: [issue94] register_avcodec and allcodecs.h [type=patch;status=open;substatus=approved]

 Roundup will then change things as you requested and remove the [...] from
 the subject before forwarding the mail to the mailing list.

 NOTE: issue = (bug report || patch || feature request)

 
 Type:
 -----
 bug

     An error, flaw, mistake, failure, or fault in FFmpeg or libav* that

     prevents it from behaving as intended.
 
 feature request
     Request of support for encoding or decoding of a new codec, container
     or variant.

     Request of support for more, less or plain different output or behavior

     where the current implementation cannot be considered wrong.

 
 patch
     A patch as generated by diff which conforms to the patch submission and

     development policy.

 
 
 Priority:
 ---------
 critical

     Bugs and patches which deal with data loss and security issues.
     No feature request can be critical.

 
 important

     Bugs which make FFmpeg unusable for a significant number of users, and

     patches fixing them.

     Examples here might be completely broken MPEG-4 decoding or a build issue

     on Linux.

     While broken 4xm decoding or a broken OS/2 build would not be important,
     the separation to normal is somewhat fuzzy.

     For feature requests this priority would be used for things many people
     want.
 
 normal
 
 
 minor
     Bugs and patches about things like spelling errors, "mp2" instead of

     "mp3" being shown and such.
     Feature requests about things few people want or which do not make a big

     difference.
 
 wish

     Something that is desirable to have but that there is no urgency at

     all to implement, e.g. something completely cosmetic like a website
     restyle or a personalized doxy template or the FFmpeg logo.
     This priority is not valid for bugs.

 
 
 Status:
 -------
 new
     initial state
 
 open
     intermediate states
 
 closed

     final state

 
 
 Type/Status/Substatus:
 ----------
 */new/new
     Initial state of new bugs, patches and feature requests submitted by

     users.

 
 */open/open

     Issues which have been briefly looked at and which did not look outright
     invalid.

     This implicates that no real more detailed state applies yet. Conversely,
     the more detailed states below implicate that the issue has been briefly

     looked at.
 
 */closed/duplicate

     Bugs, patches or feature requests which are duplicates.
     Note that patches dealing with the same thing in a different way are not
     duplicates.

     Note, if you mark something as duplicate, do not forget setting the
     superseder so bug reports are properly linked.

 
 */closed/invalid

     Bugs caused by user errors, random ineligible or otherwise nonsense stuff.

 */closed/needs_more_info
     Issues for which some information has been requested by the developers,
     but which has not been provided by anyone within reasonable time.
 

 bug/open/reproduced

     Bugs which have been reproduced.

 
 bug/open/analyzed
     Bugs which have been analyzed and where it is understood what causes them

     and which exact chain of events triggers them. This analysis should be

     available as a message in the bug report.

     Note, do not change the status to analyzed without also providing a clear
     and understandable analysis.
     This state implicates that the bug either has been reproduced or that

     reproduction is not needed as the bug is already understood.

 
 bug/open/needs_more_info

     Bug reports which are incomplete and or where more information is needed
     from the submitter or another person who can provide it.

     This state implicates that the bug has not been analyzed or reproduced.

     Note, the idea behind needs_more_info is to offload work from the
     developers to the users whenever possible.

 
 bug/closed/fixed
     Bugs which have to the best of our knowledge been fixed.
 
 bug/closed/wont_fix

     Bugs which we will not fix. Possible reasons include legality, high
     complexity for the sake of supporting obscure corner cases, speed loss
     for similarly esoteric purposes, et cetera.

     This also means that we would reject a patch.

     If we are just too lazy to fix a bug then the correct state is open

     and unassigned. Closed means that the case is closed which is not
     the case if we are just waiting for a patch.

 
 bug/closed/works_for_me
     Bugs for which sufficient information was provided to reproduce but

     reproduction failed - that is the code seems to work correctly to the

     best of our knowledge.

 
 patch/open/approved
     Patches which have been reviewed and approved by a developer.
     Such patches can be applied anytime by any other developer after some
     reasonable testing (compile + regression tests + does the patch do

     what the author claimed).

 
 patch/open/needs_changes

     Patches which have been reviewed and need changes to be accepted.

 
 patch/closed/applied

     Patches which have been applied.

 
 patch/closed/rejected

     Patches which have been rejected.

 
 feature_request/open/needs_more_info

     Feature requests where it is not clear what exactly is wanted

     (these also could be closed as invalid ...).

 
 feature_request/closed/implemented
     Feature requests which have been implemented.
 
 feature_request/closed/wont_implement

     Feature requests which will not be implemented. The reasons here could

     be legal, philosophical or others.
 
 Note, please do not use type-status-substatus combinations other than the
 above without asking on ffmpeg-dev first!

 Note2, if you provide the requested info do not forget to remove the
 needs_more_info substate.

 Topic:
 ------
 A topic is a tag you should add to your issue in order to make grouping them

 easier.
 
 avcodec
     issues in libavcodec/*
 
 avformat
     issues in libavformat/*
 
 avutil
     issues in libavutil/*
 
 regression test
     issues in tests/*
 
 ffmpeg
     issues in or related to ffmpeg.c
 
 ffplay
     issues in or related to ffplay.c
 
 ffserver
     issues in or related to ffserver.c
 
 build system
     issues in or related to configure/Makefile
 
 regression

     bugs which were working in a past revision

 
 roundup
     issues related to our issue tracker