* [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS @ 2022-04-23 16:36 Michael Niedermayer 2022-04-23 16:40 ` James Almer ` (4 more replies) 0 siblings, 5 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Michael Niedermayer @ 2022-04-23 16:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 272 bytes --] Hi all Do people prefer that 5.0 becomes LTS or the next (5.1) ? Or something else ? Thanks -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB Nations do behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives. -- Abba Eban [-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 251 bytes --] _______________________________________________ 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". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS 2022-04-23 16:36 [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS Michael Niedermayer @ 2022-04-23 16:40 ` James Almer 2022-04-23 18:08 ` Neal Gompa 2022-04-24 9:18 ` Gyan Doshi ` (3 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: James Almer @ 2022-04-23 16:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ffmpeg-devel On 4/23/2022 1:36 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > Hi all > > Do people prefer that 5.0 becomes LTS or the next (5.1) ? > Or something else ? > > Thanks 5.0 lacks the new channel layout API, and making that an LTS will give projects less incentive to migrate, so IMO, 5.1 (or a newer one) should be the LTS. _______________________________________________ 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". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS 2022-04-23 16:40 ` James Almer @ 2022-04-23 18:08 ` Neal Gompa 2022-04-23 18:14 ` James Almer 0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Neal Gompa @ 2022-04-23 18:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 12:40 PM James Almer <jamrial@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 4/23/2022 1:36 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > Hi all > > > > Do people prefer that 5.0 becomes LTS or the next (5.1) ? > > Or something else ? > > > > Thanks > > 5.0 lacks the new channel layout API, and making that an LTS will give > projects less incentive to migrate, so IMO, 5.1 (or a newer one) should > be the LTS. I thought 5.x was the LTS series already. Maybe I misunderstood, but I expected that the 5.x series does not break API/ABI, so minor versions of the 5.0 major series would be part of the same LTS and supported for that timeframe. At least, that was my impression when I started bringing ffmpeg into Fedora... -- 真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ 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". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS 2022-04-23 18:08 ` Neal Gompa @ 2022-04-23 18:14 ` James Almer 2022-04-23 18:17 ` Neal Gompa 0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: James Almer @ 2022-04-23 18:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ffmpeg-devel On 4/23/2022 3:08 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 12:40 PM James Almer <jamrial@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On 4/23/2022 1:36 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: >>> Hi all >>> >>> Do people prefer that 5.0 becomes LTS or the next (5.1) ? >>> Or something else ? >>> >>> Thanks >> >> 5.0 lacks the new channel layout API, and making that an LTS will give >> projects less incentive to migrate, so IMO, 5.1 (or a newer one) should >> be the LTS. > > I thought 5.x was the LTS series already. Maybe I misunderstood, but I > expected that the 5.x series does not break API/ABI, so minor versions > of the 5.0 major series would be part of the same LTS and supported > for that timeframe. No 5.x release will break existing API/ABI, but all can and most likely will introduce new API. So if you target 5.0, you can use 5.x just fine. As an example, 5.1 will be the first with a new channel layout API in lavu, which will of course live alongside the old (now marked as deprecated) until a major bump takes place in a couple years. > > At least, that was my impression when I started bringing ffmpeg into Fedora... > > > > > -- > 真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth! > _______________________________________________ > 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". _______________________________________________ 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". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS 2022-04-23 18:14 ` James Almer @ 2022-04-23 18:17 ` Neal Gompa 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Neal Gompa @ 2022-04-23 18:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 2:15 PM James Almer <jamrial@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 4/23/2022 3:08 PM, Neal Gompa wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 12:40 PM James Almer <jamrial@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> On 4/23/2022 1:36 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > >>> Hi all > >>> > >>> Do people prefer that 5.0 becomes LTS or the next (5.1) ? > >>> Or something else ? > >>> > >>> Thanks > >> > >> 5.0 lacks the new channel layout API, and making that an LTS will give > >> projects less incentive to migrate, so IMO, 5.1 (or a newer one) should > >> be the LTS. > > > > I thought 5.x was the LTS series already. Maybe I misunderstood, but I > > expected that the 5.x series does not break API/ABI, so minor versions > > of the 5.0 major series would be part of the same LTS and supported > > for that timeframe. > > No 5.x release will break existing API/ABI, but all can and most likely > will introduce new API. So if you target 5.0, you can use 5.x just fine. > So, that aligns with my expectations. > As an example, 5.1 will be the first with a new channel layout API in > lavu, which will of course live alongside the old (now marked as > deprecated) until a major bump takes place in a couple years. > So then, to me, it makes sense to shift the LTS to 5.1 as part of the LTS 5.x cycle. It gets people upgrading and satisfies people's general expectation here (including mine). -- 真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ 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". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS 2022-04-23 16:36 [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS Michael Niedermayer 2022-04-23 16:40 ` James Almer @ 2022-04-24 9:18 ` Gyan Doshi 2022-04-24 9:55 ` Steven Liu ` (2 subsequent siblings) 4 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Gyan Doshi @ 2022-04-24 9:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ffmpeg-devel On 2022-04-23 10:06 pm, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > Hi all > > Do people prefer that 5.0 becomes LTS or the next (5.1) ? > Or something else ? A LTS release should be prospectively designated. That way, devs can prioritze their efforts and enterprise users can plan a roadmap for deployment. So, not 5.0. Regards, Gyan _______________________________________________ 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". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS 2022-04-23 16:36 [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS Michael Niedermayer 2022-04-23 16:40 ` James Almer 2022-04-24 9:18 ` Gyan Doshi @ 2022-04-24 9:55 ` Steven Liu 2022-04-24 22:48 ` Soft Works 2022-04-25 11:51 ` Jean-Baptiste Kempf 4 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Steven Liu @ 2022-04-24 9:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches; +Cc: Steven Liu > 2022年4月24日 00:36,Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc> 写道: > > Hi all > > Do people prefer that 5.0 becomes LTS or the next (5.1) ? > Or something else ? I think 5.0 or 5.1 is ok. Because LTS is just for stable, I am looking at maillist, There have lots of patch will change lots of code every version, So whatever of them, I think 5.0 has removed the main deprecated warning message, so this maybe the first LTS version. > > Thanks > > -- > Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB > > Nations do behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives. > -- Abba Eban > _______________________________________________ > 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". Thanks Steven Liu _______________________________________________ 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". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS 2022-04-23 16:36 [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS Michael Niedermayer ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2022-04-24 9:55 ` Steven Liu @ 2022-04-24 22:48 ` Soft Works 2022-04-25 8:01 ` Paul B Mahol 2022-04-25 11:51 ` Jean-Baptiste Kempf 4 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Soft Works @ 2022-04-24 22:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches > -----Original Message----- > From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of > Michael Niedermayer > Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2022 6:36 PM > To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg- > devel@ffmpeg.org> > Subject: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS > > Hi all > > Do people prefer that 5.0 becomes LTS or the next (5.1) ? > Or something else ? @Anton - I'm wondering how your multi-threading transformations to ffmpeg.c would align with the release schedule? I think an LTS release should be either before or after the series of changes you are planning. It would be unfortunate when 5.1 would be somewhere in the middle of those changes and become LTS. (as you said it could take a year in the worst case) Thanks, softworkz _______________________________________________ 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". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS 2022-04-24 22:48 ` Soft Works @ 2022-04-25 8:01 ` Paul B Mahol 2022-04-25 9:04 ` Soft Works 0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Paul B Mahol @ 2022-04-25 8:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 12:48 AM Soft Works <softworkz@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of > > Michael Niedermayer > > Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2022 6:36 PM > > To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg- > > devel@ffmpeg.org> > > Subject: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS > > > > Hi all > > > > Do people prefer that 5.0 becomes LTS or the next (5.1) ? > > Or something else ? > > @Anton - I'm wondering how your multi-threading transformations > to ffmpeg.c would align with the release schedule? > > I think an LTS release should be either before or after the > series of changes you are planning. It would be unfortunate > when 5.1 would be somewhere in the middle of those changes > and become LTS. > (as you said it could take a year in the worst case) > > I'm still expecting info that you said to provide. > Thanks, > softworkz > _______________________________________________ > 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". > _______________________________________________ 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". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS 2022-04-25 8:01 ` Paul B Mahol @ 2022-04-25 9:04 ` Soft Works 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Soft Works @ 2022-04-25 9:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches > -----Original Message----- > From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Paul > B Mahol > Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 10:01 AM > To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg- > devel@ffmpeg.org> > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 12:48 AM Soft Works <softworkz@hotmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of > > > Michael Niedermayer > > > Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2022 6:36 PM > > > To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg- > > > devel@ffmpeg.org> > > > Subject: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS > > > > > > Hi all > > > > > > Do people prefer that 5.0 becomes LTS or the next (5.1) ? > > > Or something else ? > > > > @Anton - I'm wondering how your multi-threading transformations > > to ffmpeg.c would align with the release schedule? > > > > I think an LTS release should be either before or after the > > series of changes you are planning. It would be unfortunate > > when 5.1 would be somewhere in the middle of those changes > > and become LTS. > > (as you said it could take a year in the worst case) > > > > > I'm still expecting info that you said to provide. That "information" is about explaining why I said that it's difficult to debug filtering in ffmpeg. I haven't forgot about and I'll get to it shortly. As I mentioned before, I'm concerned about the transitioning process but not opposed to the end result. My suggestion was to retain the current code flow as an option, but nobody else found it useful - that's ok, I have no intentions to insist. Besides that, from my personal pov: the faster it can be driven to completion, the better, so there's just a "before-state" (the current state) and a "completion state" to care about. Having a release in-between would create an additional state to deal with, and that's what I would find unfortunate. softworkz _______________________________________________ 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". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS 2022-04-23 16:36 [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS Michael Niedermayer ` (3 preceding siblings ...) 2022-04-24 22:48 ` Soft Works @ 2022-04-25 11:51 ` Jean-Baptiste Kempf 2022-04-25 17:19 ` Michael Niedermayer 4 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Jean-Baptiste Kempf @ 2022-04-25 11:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ffmpeg-devel On Sat, 23 Apr 2022, at 18:36, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > Do people prefer that 5.0 becomes LTS or the next (5.1) ? > Or something else ? My understanding of the consensus was; - 5.0 in Dec/Jan - 5.1 in Jul with API additions, but no ABI/behavior breakage - 6.0 in Dec 22 with ABI/API/behavior breakage and while 5.1 becomes LTS - 6.1 in Jul 23... -- Jean-Baptiste Kempf - President +33 672 704 734 _______________________________________________ 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". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS 2022-04-25 11:51 ` Jean-Baptiste Kempf @ 2022-04-25 17:19 ` Michael Niedermayer 2022-04-25 18:04 ` Jean-Baptiste Kempf 2022-04-25 18:38 ` James Almer 0 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Michael Niedermayer @ 2022-04-25 17:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 913 bytes --] On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 01:51:26PM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > On Sat, 23 Apr 2022, at 18:36, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > Do people prefer that 5.0 becomes LTS or the next (5.1) ? > > Or something else ? > > My understanding of the consensus was; > - 5.0 in Dec/Jan > - 5.1 in Jul with API additions, but no ABI/behavior breakage yes > - 6.0 in Dec 22 with ABI/API/behavior breakage and while 5.1 becomes LTS we could give 5.1 an LTS "tag" when its released already also thers the possibility that by december we have nothing that really benefits from a ABI/API/behavior breakage. If that happens people might prefer 5.2 over 6.0 i dont know. thx [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB Does the universe only have a finite lifespan? No, its going to go on forever, its just that you wont like living in it. -- Hiranya Peiri [-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 251 bytes --] _______________________________________________ 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". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS 2022-04-25 17:19 ` Michael Niedermayer @ 2022-04-25 18:04 ` Jean-Baptiste Kempf 2022-04-25 18:40 ` Michael Niedermayer 2022-04-25 18:38 ` James Almer 1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Jean-Baptiste Kempf @ 2022-04-25 18:04 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ffmpeg-devel On Mon, 25 Apr 2022, at 19:19, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 01:51:26PM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: >> On Sat, 23 Apr 2022, at 18:36, Michael Niedermayer wrote: >> > Do people prefer that 5.0 becomes LTS or the next (5.1) ? >> > Or something else ? >> >> My understanding of the consensus was; >> - 5.0 in Dec/Jan >> - 5.1 in Jul with API additions, but no ABI/behavior breakage > > yes OK. >> - 6.0 in Dec 22 with ABI/API/behavior breakage and while 5.1 becomes LTS > > we could give 5.1 an LTS "tag" when its released already I would mention it, tbh. > also thers the possibility that by december we have nothing that really > benefits from a ABI/API/behavior breakage. > If that happens people might prefer 5.2 over 6.0 i dont know. I think it would be clearer to accustom people that we have one big potential change every year, at the same date. jb -- Jean-Baptiste Kempf - President +33 672 704 734 _______________________________________________ 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". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS 2022-04-25 18:04 ` Jean-Baptiste Kempf @ 2022-04-25 18:40 ` Michael Niedermayer 2022-04-25 19:40 ` Soft Works 2022-04-25 19:44 ` Jean-Baptiste Kempf 0 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Michael Niedermayer @ 2022-04-25 18:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1349 bytes --] On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 08:04:25PM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > On Mon, 25 Apr 2022, at 19:19, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 01:51:26PM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > >> On Sat, 23 Apr 2022, at 18:36, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > >> > Do people prefer that 5.0 becomes LTS or the next (5.1) ? > >> > Or something else ? > >> > >> My understanding of the consensus was; > >> - 5.0 in Dec/Jan > >> - 5.1 in Jul with API additions, but no ABI/behavior breakage > > > > yes > > OK. > > >> - 6.0 in Dec 22 with ABI/API/behavior breakage and while 5.1 becomes LTS > > > > we could give 5.1 an LTS "tag" when its released already > > I would mention it, tbh. > > > also thers the possibility that by december we have nothing that really > > benefits from a ABI/API/behavior breakage. > > If that happens people might prefer 5.2 over 6.0 i dont know. > > I think it would be clearer to accustom people that we have one big potential change every year, at the same date. thats not a bad idea. Still bumping the sonames of the libs when there is no reason is not really nice. I dont know if we will have a reason in december thx [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB It is what and why we do it that matters, not just one of them. [-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 251 bytes --] _______________________________________________ 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". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS 2022-04-25 18:40 ` Michael Niedermayer @ 2022-04-25 19:40 ` Soft Works 2022-04-25 19:44 ` Jean-Baptiste Kempf 1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Soft Works @ 2022-04-25 19:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches > -----Original Message----- > From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of > Michael Niedermayer > Sent: Monday, April 25, 2022 8:40 PM > To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg- > devel@ffmpeg.org> > Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 08:04:25PM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > > On Mon, 25 Apr 2022, at 19:19, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 01:51:26PM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Kempf > wrote: > > >> On Sat, 23 Apr 2022, at 18:36, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > >> > Do people prefer that 5.0 becomes LTS or the next (5.1) ? > > >> > Or something else ? > > >> > > >> My understanding of the consensus was; > > >> - 5.0 in Dec/Jan > > >> - 5.1 in Jul with API additions, but no ABI/behavior breakage > > > > > > yes > > > > OK. > > > > >> - 6.0 in Dec 22 with ABI/API/behavior breakage and while 5.1 > becomes LTS > > > > > > we could give 5.1 an LTS "tag" when its released already > > > > I would mention it, tbh. > > > > > also thers the possibility that by december we have nothing that > really > > > benefits from a ABI/API/behavior breakage. > > > If that happens people might prefer 5.2 over 6.0 i dont know. > > > > I think it would be clearer to accustom people that we have one big > potential change every year, at the same date. > > thats not a bad idea. Still bumping the sonames of the libs when there > is > no reason is not really nice. I dont know if we will have a reason in > december I think, the most valid reason to increase a version number is the publishing of a release :-) Totally crazy concept: ffmpeg 6.0 libavutil.so.6.0.100 libavcodec.so.6.0.100 libavfilter.so.6.0.100 libavformat.so.6.0.100 ... ffmpeg 6.1 libavutil.so.6.1.100 libavcodec.so.6.1.100 libavfilter.so.6.1.100 libavformat.so.6.1.100 ... Best, softworkz (yes, I mean no cross-version compatibility) _______________________________________________ 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". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS 2022-04-25 18:40 ` Michael Niedermayer 2022-04-25 19:40 ` Soft Works @ 2022-04-25 19:44 ` Jean-Baptiste Kempf 2022-04-26 13:32 ` Michael Niedermayer 1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Jean-Baptiste Kempf @ 2022-04-25 19:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ffmpeg-devel On Mon, 25 Apr 2022, at 20:40, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 08:04:25PM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: >> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022, at 19:19, Michael Niedermayer wrote: >> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 01:51:26PM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: >> >> On Sat, 23 Apr 2022, at 18:36, Michael Niedermayer wrote: >> >> > Do people prefer that 5.0 becomes LTS or the next (5.1) ? >> >> > Or something else ? >> >> >> >> My understanding of the consensus was; >> >> - 5.0 in Dec/Jan >> >> - 5.1 in Jul with API additions, but no ABI/behavior breakage >> > >> > yes >> >> OK. >> >> >> - 6.0 in Dec 22 with ABI/API/behavior breakage and while 5.1 becomes LTS >> > >> > we could give 5.1 an LTS "tag" when its released already >> >> I would mention it, tbh. >> >> > also thers the possibility that by december we have nothing that really >> > benefits from a ABI/API/behavior breakage. >> > If that happens people might prefer 5.2 over 6.0 i dont know. >> >> I think it would be clearer to accustom people that we have one big potential change every year, at the same date. > > thats not a bad idea. Still bumping the sonames of the libs when there is > no reason is not really nice. I dont know if we will have a reason in december A major number does not mean major soname bump if not needed. This is release numbers. -- Jean-Baptiste Kempf - President +33 672 704 734 _______________________________________________ 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". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS 2022-04-25 19:44 ` Jean-Baptiste Kempf @ 2022-04-26 13:32 ` Michael Niedermayer 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Michael Niedermayer @ 2022-04-26 13:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches [-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1738 bytes --] On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 09:44:58PM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > > > On Mon, 25 Apr 2022, at 20:40, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 08:04:25PM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > >> On Mon, 25 Apr 2022, at 19:19, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > >> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 01:51:26PM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > >> >> On Sat, 23 Apr 2022, at 18:36, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > >> >> > Do people prefer that 5.0 becomes LTS or the next (5.1) ? > >> >> > Or something else ? > >> >> > >> >> My understanding of the consensus was; > >> >> - 5.0 in Dec/Jan > >> >> - 5.1 in Jul with API additions, but no ABI/behavior breakage > >> > > >> > yes > >> > >> OK. > >> > >> >> - 6.0 in Dec 22 with ABI/API/behavior breakage and while 5.1 becomes LTS > >> > > >> > we could give 5.1 an LTS "tag" when its released already > >> > >> I would mention it, tbh. > >> > >> > also thers the possibility that by december we have nothing that really > >> > benefits from a ABI/API/behavior breakage. > >> > If that happens people might prefer 5.2 over 6.0 i dont know. > >> > >> I think it would be clearer to accustom people that we have one big potential change every year, at the same date. > > > > thats not a bad idea. Still bumping the sonames of the libs when there is > > no reason is not really nice. I dont know if we will have a reason in december > > A major number does not mean major soname bump if not needed. > This is release numbers. indeed thx [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB Elect your leaders based on what they did after the last election, not based on what they say before an election. [-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --] [-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 251 bytes --] _______________________________________________ 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". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS 2022-04-25 17:19 ` Michael Niedermayer 2022-04-25 18:04 ` Jean-Baptiste Kempf @ 2022-04-25 18:38 ` James Almer 1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: James Almer @ 2022-04-25 18:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ffmpeg-devel On 4/25/2022 2:19 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 01:51:26PM +0200, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: >> On Sat, 23 Apr 2022, at 18:36, Michael Niedermayer wrote: >>> Do people prefer that 5.0 becomes LTS or the next (5.1) ? >>> Or something else ? >> >> My understanding of the consensus was; >> - 5.0 in Dec/Jan >> - 5.1 in Jul with API additions, but no ABI/behavior breakage > > yes > > >> - 6.0 in Dec 22 with ABI/API/behavior breakage and while 5.1 becomes LTS > > we could give 5.1 an LTS "tag" when its released already > also thers the possibility that by december we have nothing that really > benefits from a ABI/API/behavior breakage. > If that happens people might prefer 5.2 over 6.0 i dont know. An ABI bump doesn't need to be justified by the need to break something for the sake of an addition, like new fields to structs with ABI-tied size (of which there are not many, for that matter). It could simply be done in an scheduled manner to get rid of deprecated stuff that's old enough to be dropped, giving the project some predictability, and keeping the tree clean-ish. > > thx > > [...] > > > _______________________________________________ > 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". _______________________________________________ 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". ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-04-26 13:32 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 18+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2022-04-23 16:36 [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS Michael Niedermayer 2022-04-23 16:40 ` James Almer 2022-04-23 18:08 ` Neal Gompa 2022-04-23 18:14 ` James Almer 2022-04-23 18:17 ` Neal Gompa 2022-04-24 9:18 ` Gyan Doshi 2022-04-24 9:55 ` Steven Liu 2022-04-24 22:48 ` Soft Works 2022-04-25 8:01 ` Paul B Mahol 2022-04-25 9:04 ` Soft Works 2022-04-25 11:51 ` Jean-Baptiste Kempf 2022-04-25 17:19 ` Michael Niedermayer 2022-04-25 18:04 ` Jean-Baptiste Kempf 2022-04-25 18:40 ` Michael Niedermayer 2022-04-25 19:40 ` Soft Works 2022-04-25 19:44 ` Jean-Baptiste Kempf 2022-04-26 13:32 ` Michael Niedermayer 2022-04-25 18:38 ` James Almer
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