On Sun, Jan 02, 2022 at 11:29:18PM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 02, 2022 at 07:12:54PM +0100, Lynne wrote:
> > 2 Jan 2022, 18:11 by michael@niedermayer.cc:
> > 
> > > On Sun, Jan 02, 2022 at 05:28:24PM +0100, Lynne wrote:
> > >
> > >> 2 Jan 2022, 16:52 by zane@zanevaniperen.com:
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On 3/1/22 01:09, James Almer wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >>>> Reverting something in the release branch is already going to be dirty
> > >> >>>> no matter what, because we do a minor bump to ensure the release has its
> > >> >>>> own soname. Right now that'd mean 5.0 will be lavf 59.13, while lacking
> > >> >>>> a demuxer available in lavf 59.12
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Depends on what you mean by "lacking a demuxer"... One (hacky) option would
> > >> >>> be to replace it with a stub implementation that always fails.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Or tag it as experimental.
> > >> >>
> > >> >
> > >> > That's much better. If we're not willing to wait, then I suggest we do this.
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> I'd rather have it reverted in master, branch 5.0, and add it back and bump minor
> > >> again. I'm not willing to wait for a month to get fuzzing, the release is way
> > >> overdue as-is. We generally don't put experimental on decoders or demuxers.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I think if we dont want it in the release either as you suggest
> > > revert in master or mark as experimental in master before the branch
> > >
> > > having special cases in the release branch feels a bit iffy
> > >
> > 
> > Okay, I can live with an experimental flag on it for the time being.
> 
> Ok, please add that experimental flag then

disregard that, just saw antons patch

thx

[...]

-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Republics decline into democracies and democracies degenerate into
despotisms. -- Aristotle