From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (ffbox0-bg.ffmpeg.org [79.124.17.100]) by master.gitmailbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C050248A5C for ; Sun, 28 Jan 2024 10:38:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.1.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A36268D175; Sun, 28 Jan 2024 12:38:42 +0200 (EET) Received: from mail0.khirnov.net (red.khirnov.net [176.97.15.12]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE5DA68CA69 for ; Sun, 28 Jan 2024 12:38:35 +0200 (EET) Authentication-Results: mail0.khirnov.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=khirnov.net header.i=@khirnov.net header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mail header.b=pj5QyutB; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mail0.khirnov.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8133D2405F2 for ; Sun, 28 Jan 2024 11:38:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail0.khirnov.net ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mail0.khirnov.net [IPv6:::1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP id PD3BB-0U2Jqv for ; Sun, 28 Jan 2024 11:38:34 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=khirnov.net; s=mail; t=1706438314; bh=ys9IftlzWGAzJ6R6PjR3XULuyvyIwFycjCKqg8OTiGU=; h=Subject:From:To:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=pj5QyutB4E7nQPbkKx8w/MbolMpGxhjwz/5amG1Fbp4AgKs0GR0IMGdDlIkEqobm2 AkDbB2Vn+bjNs/9R4YCFEZmwn9prck9HM3SfygM4pmCzB8Hll0JYZHHxY4Mzr3HmRA B+gcjZsFvteRujlArIjIDbPdFBuA4h3euam2LRT8nMg961fCK3syBprJytrCP21XBF CNjKck9jABdi84fyu8a+m4kuKXyvBWqH3IL7Yop6SOYyGCseQ7KDSQKUX5WKThQlEf C7xs/zVal9GzrdDsXThvbNobNvTPyUJfEDT0xokAMIaU9nUQCvCx2mIsebVLPOmMr+ Y53WtnCOkiiFQ== Received: from lain.khirnov.net (lain.khirnov.net [IPv6:2001:67c:1138:4306::3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "lain.khirnov.net", Issuer "smtp.khirnov.net SMTP CA" (verified OK)) by mail0.khirnov.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1AB62404E5 for ; Sun, 28 Jan 2024 11:38:34 +0100 (CET) Received: by lain.khirnov.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9FC0F1601B9; Sun, 28 Jan 2024 11:38:34 +0100 (CET) From: Anton Khirnov To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches In-Reply-To: <20240124134533.GB24498@haasn.xyz> References: <20240123192241.GA6420@pb2> <20240124134533.GB24498@haasn.xyz> Mail-Followup-To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2024 11:38:34 +0100 Message-ID: <170643831462.8914.17134081481336086733@lain.khirnov.net> User-Agent: alot/0.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 7.0 blocking issues X-BeenThere: ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: FFmpeg development discussions and patches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org Sender: "ffmpeg-devel" Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Post: Quoting Niklas Haas (2024-01-24 13:45:33) > On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 20:22:41 +0100 Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > Hi all > > > > As it was a little difficult for me to not loose track of what is > > blocking a release. I suggest that for all release blocking issues > > open a ticket and set Blocking to 7.0 > > that way this: > > https://trac.ffmpeg.org/query?blocking=~7.0 > > > > or for the ones not closed: > > https://trac.ffmpeg.org/query?status=new&status=open&status=reopened&blocking=~7.0 > > > > will list all blocking issues > > > > Ive added one, for testing that, i intend to add more if i see something > > > > What is blocking? (IMHO) > > * regressions (unless its non possible to fix before release) > > * crashes > > * security issues > > * data loss > > * privacy issues > > * anything the commuity agrees should be in the release > > I'd like to discuss YUVJ deprecation/removal. To what extent do we need to put > an additional deprecation warning on these? libswscale already prints a warning > on every use, informing the user that they need to set metadata correctly. > > Is it feasible to replace YUVJ pixfmts by #define for their non-YUV equivalent > analogs in 7.0? 7.1? What would then happens to current lavc and lavfi callers that still use them? AFAIU you cannot avoid them until your patchset goes in, right? -- 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".