From: Anton Khirnov <anton@khirnov.net>
To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 3/3] doc/developer.texi: add a section on API/ABI compatibility
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2023 09:10:19 +0100
Message-ID: <167938621928.27013.15093722917572734217@lain.khirnov.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230320222611.GI48946@mariano>
Just FYI I've already pushed these patches, but I appreciate the
comments anyway.
Quoting Stefano Sabatini (2023-03-20 23:26:11)
> On date Wednesday 2023-03-15 15:07:46 +0100, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> > Document established practices in it.
> > ---
> > doc/developer.texi | 162 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > 1 file changed, 146 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/doc/developer.texi b/doc/developer.texi
> > index 5e283227be..c625a9feed 100644
> > --- a/doc/developer.texi
> > +++ b/doc/developer.texi
> > @@ -217,6 +217,7 @@ int myfunc(int my_parameter)
> > ...
> > @end example
> >
> > +@anchor{Naming conventions}
> > @section Naming conventions
> [...]
> > +
> > +@anchor{Major version bumps}
> > +@subsection Major version bumps
> > +A major version bump signifies an API and/or ABI compatibility break. To reduce
> > +the negative effects on our callers, who are required to adapt their code,
> > +backward-incompatible changes during a major bump should be limited to:
> > +@itemize @bullet
> > +@item
> > +Removing previously deprecated APIs.
> > +
> > +@item
> > +Performing ABI- but not API-breaking changes, like reordering struct contents.
> > +@end itemize
> > +
>
> This sounds a bit ambiguous. What qualifies "previously deprecated
> APIs"? It looks to me that the current practice is to drop deprecated
> symbols after 2 major bumps, so that users have the opportunity to
> adapt their code depending on the deprecations warnings before the
> deprecated symbols are finally removed at the next bump. If that's so,
> maybe this can be formalized here.
The ambiguity is actually deliberate, because I know different
developers have different opinions on what the criterium should be
exactly, and I did not want this whole new text to be bikeshud to death
because of this. My plan was to push this text with ambiguous wording,
and then later add a precise rule.
The previous "consensus rule" was to remove APIs after they've been
deprecated for two yeas, but in recent developer meetings it was
universally agreed that time-based rules do not make sense. The main
alternative suggestions that I remember is that a major bump removes
things that were deprecated in X previous major releases (I'm personally
in favor of this with X=2).
Other suggestions, along with arguments for why they are the obviously
correct choice, are very much welcome.
--
Anton Khirnov
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-21 8:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-15 14:07 [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 1/3] doc/developer.texi: document the use of other languages than C Anton Khirnov
2023-03-15 14:07 ` [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/3] doc/developer.texi: document checkasm Anton Khirnov
2023-03-20 22:13 ` Stefano Sabatini
2023-03-15 14:07 ` [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 3/3] doc/developer.texi: add a section on API/ABI compatibility Anton Khirnov
2023-03-20 22:26 ` Stefano Sabatini
2023-03-21 8:10 ` Anton Khirnov [this message]
2023-03-20 22:13 ` [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 1/3] doc/developer.texi: document the use of other languages than C Stefano Sabatini
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=167938621928.27013.15093722917572734217@lain.khirnov.net \
--to=anton@khirnov.net \
--cc=ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Git Inbox Mirror of the ffmpeg-devel mailing list - see https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:
git clone --mirror https://master.gitmailbox.com/ffmpegdev/0 ffmpegdev/git/0.git
# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
public-inbox-init -V2 ffmpegdev ffmpegdev/ https://master.gitmailbox.com/ffmpegdev \
ffmpegdev@gitmailbox.com
public-inbox-index ffmpegdev
Example config snippet for mirrors.
AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git