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 D52474B319 for ; Mon, 3 Jun 2024 21:32:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.1.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1534E68D6BB; Tue, 4 Jun 2024 00:32:46 +0300 (EEST) Received: from relay9-d.mail.gandi.net (relay9-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.199]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B84D368D612 for ; Tue, 4 Jun 2024 00:32:38 +0300 (EEST) Received: by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EBB61FF804 for ; Mon, 3 Jun 2024 21:32:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=niedermayer.cc; s=gm1; t=1717450358; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=i0K+dC/bKi7msrfXVW8jC7J2YTBuOLt7ILC+r2sN3fw=; b=gTieuUakocQaxK2uY4E8yP83QxO+mQfR/Pa/R5cXggpUwBVrNEKepYRDbpRtOu7O+O+L+k wEzO7bnSHVJCQ773bKZEDkzSk9tmObIVZFRt5K+RL48Fm8dMapJUF9Px/tjI825OSoJg0r fTYaeGbQ4V923mX6IgR6fFb2drO296+RF4oB8APumJ7VABvN4D11OdV8F9Jfq17Gu8FwBW 0V0QHPXR/JJeOO+EFR4bcbT24xL404DqubLeTOLDTrkA+Bz7aqxe6Fy9rVc7XKC4nPiMPL kLqLw72QyjltEfI3MjQKAdU20s2iJnVmIgF9E69cpQ+bZkZyfTY3If0bruKkFw== Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 23:32:37 +0200 From: Michael Niedermayer To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches Message-ID: <20240603213237.GC2821752@pb2> References: <20240123192241.GA6420@pb2> <20240302225538.GI6420@pb2> <20240302231928.GJ6420@pb2> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-GND-Sasl: michael@niedermayer.cc 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: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3748599338970422384==" Errors-To: ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org Sender: "ffmpeg-devel" Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Post: --===============3748599338970422384== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Aqxj+GViP82BhQLt" Content-Disposition: inline --Aqxj+GViP82BhQLt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jun 02, 2024 at 03:49:42PM +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > On 2024-03-03 09:55:15 +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > > On 2024-03-02 20:39:08 -0500, Sean McGovern wrote: > > > On Sat, Mar 2, 2024, 18:19 Michael Niedermayer > > > wrote: > > >=20 > > > > On Sun, Mar 03, 2024 at 12:06:14AM +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > > > > > On 2024-03-02 23:55:38 +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 08:22:41PM +0100, Michael Niedermayer w= rote: > > > > > > > Hi all > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As it was a little difficult for me to not loose track of wha= t is > > > > > > > blocking a release. I suggest that for all release blocking i= ssues > > > > > > > open a ticket and set Blocking to 7.0 > > > > > > > that way this: > > > > > > > https://trac.ffmpeg.org/query?blocking=3D~7.0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or for the ones not closed: > > > > > > > > > > > https://trac.ffmpeg.org/query?status=3Dnew&status=3Dopen&status=3Dr= eopened&blocking=3D~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 > > > > > > > > > > > > We still have 3 blocking issues on trac > > > > > > > > > > > > do people want me to wait or ignore them and branch ? > > > > > > Iam not sure when the exact deadline is but if we keep waiting > > > > > > we will not get into ubuntu 24.04 LTS > > > > > > > > > > 24.04 is past feature freeze, so it's too late for that. > > > > > > > > we should aim earlier in the future then. > > > > > > > > > > >=20 > > > LTS is only every 2 years, yes? > >=20 > > Yes > >=20 > > > How do we make sure this doesn't happen in 2026? How much of a gap is= there > > > between feature freeze and release? > >=20 > > Not involved in Ubuntu, so that's from past experience: feature > > freeze is usually about two months before the release. > >=20 > > So here's the catch: Debian's timeline also needs to be taken into > > account. If the ffmpeg release does not involve the removal of deprecat= ed API and > > a SONAME bump, then the time from ffmpeg to release to upload to Debian > > unstable and then import in Ubuntu is short. In this case, I am sure > > that I could convince Ubuntu maintainers to import it even during > > feature freeze. > >=20 > > But with SONAME bumps and changes in the API, it takes a lot more time > > to work through the high number of ffmpeg reverse dependencies. In that > > case, plan a release at least 6 months before an Ubuntu LTS release. >=20 >=20 >=20 > >=20 > > We usually have to rely on upstream maintainers to adopt to the > > changes and that take times. Many moons ago Anton helped with providing > > patches, but for the last couple of API changes it took some months from > > "dear maintainer, here is ffmpeg X for testing, please fix the build of > > your package" to actually doing all uploads and rebuilds. For example, > > the transition to ffmpeg 6.0 was started in July 2023 and was done in > > December 2023. >=20 > Just as a FYI: ffmpeg 7.0 breaks close to 70 reverse dependencies in > Debian. The list is available at [1]. So if you want ffmpeg X to be in > Debian Y or Ubuntu Z, X needs to be released at least half a year before > Y or Z freeze. Is there something that ffmpeg can do to reduce this breakage ? (i know its a bit of a lame question as its API brekages but i mean can the policy we have about deprecating API/ABI be amended in some way to make this easier ? Also am i correct that it should be easier if a X.1 with same API/ABI that = is released 6 month after X.0 is targetet for the release ? Thats in fact kind of what i would have preferred anyway as the .1 likely has also fewer bugs And last but not least, someone needs to write down when .0 and .1 releases= should be made so I dont forget it :) thx [...] --=20 Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB Nations do behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives.= =20 -- Abba Eban --Aqxj+GViP82BhQLt Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EABEKAB0WIQSf8hKLFH72cwut8TNhHseHBAsPqwUCZl42bgAKCRBhHseHBAsP q64sAJ9K6rkZMAH2NA63qPs2uMROFMBZDgCfaFwTmbi9BGHi+xans55QPLCqEx8= =x5Mx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Aqxj+GViP82BhQLt-- --===============3748599338970422384== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ 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". --===============3748599338970422384==--