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 8064B4535E for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 20:08:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.1.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09B9368BCDD; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 22:08:19 +0200 (EET) Received: from iq.passwd.hu (iq.passwd.hu [217.27.212.140]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B5B368B00B for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 22:08:13 +0200 (EET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by iq.passwd.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E69BE8544 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 21:08:10 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at passwd.hu Received: from iq.passwd.hu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (iq.passwd.hu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L87sxrmDORV2 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 21:08:07 +0100 (CET) Received: from iq (iq [217.27.212.140]) by iq.passwd.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3D8EE7979 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 21:08:06 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2023 21:08:06 +0100 (CET) From: Marton Balint To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches In-Reply-To: <6b01240d-95e2-db84-c40b-329a72b958c5@gmail.com> Message-ID: <7debdfb5-bbb3-e4c6-f95-a89a463d3abd@passwd.hu> References: <20230116133840.512-1-jamrial@gmail.com> <167457514256.4503.7425182589774123747@lain.khirnov.net> <6b01240d-95e2-db84-c40b-329a72b958c5@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 00/26] Major library version bump 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-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org Sender: "ffmpeg-devel" Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Post: On Wed, 25 Jan 2023, James Almer wrote: > On 1/24/2023 12:45 PM, Anton Khirnov wrote: >> So to summarize the discussion so far: >> >> * nobody is strongly arguing for an instability period after the bump, >> and there are good reasons against it, therefore we should NOT have >> one >> >> * the bump can be done either as bump-then-remove or remove-then-bump >> * there are advantages and disadvantages for both of those, nobody >> expressed a strong preference for either, so you can keep this as >> is >> >> Please correct me if I misunderstood or missed something, or somebody >> has a new opinion. > > Since the instability period doesn't seem popular, if anyone has some patches > for ABI changes (enum value or field offset changes, removing avpriv_ > functions we forgot about, etc), then please send them asap so i can push > them all at the same time. Ok, I can send the frame number changes tomorrow. When do you plan to do the actual bump? I assumed the last 5.x release should be branched first. Regards, Marton _______________________________________________ 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".