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 D69C844DF6 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 23:25:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.1.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 222AE68BB91; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 01:25:50 +0200 (EET) Received: from iq.passwd.hu (iq.passwd.hu [217.27.212.140]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id BABAC68BB64 for ; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 01:25:43 +0200 (EET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by iq.passwd.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F1AEE8659 for ; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 00:25:41 +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 N_pTiJjhqIRu for ; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 00:25:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from iq (iq [217.27.212.140]) by iq.passwd.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D008E84D1 for ; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 00:25:39 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2023 00:25:39 +0100 (CET) From: Marton Balint To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches In-Reply-To: <4ee57c81-5811-4590-84f9-518104d1ce48@betaapp.fastmail.com> Message-ID: References: <20230116133840.512-1-jamrial@gmail.com> <167457514256.4503.7425182589774123747@lain.khirnov.net> <6b01240d-95e2-db84-c40b-329a72b958c5@gmail.com> <7debdfb5-bbb3-e4c6-f95-a89a463d3abd@passwd.hu> <4997c7ce-3db3-4062-b3b4-f65719debc43@betaapp.fastmail.com> <4ee57c81-5811-4590-84f9-518104d1ce48@betaapp.fastmail.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, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jan 2023, at 23:28, Marton Balint wrote: >> On Wed, 25 Jan 2023, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 25 Jan 2023, at 22:03, Marton Balint wrote: >>>> On Wed, 25 Jan 2023, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Wed, 25 Jan 2023, at 21:08, Marton Balint wrote: >>>>>> 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. >>>>> >>>>> Why? 5.1 was already branched out. >>>> >>>> And is missing 6 months of development. >>> >>> So you want us to release both 6.0 and 5.2 at the same time? >>> I don't get it. >> >> I don't see too much benefit in releasing 6.0 right now just because we >> bumped API, beacuse API bump typically means API removal, not addition. > > Because that's what we agreed on? > Do a major release every year in Dec/Jan with an ABI/API breakage at that time. > > If you want to do a 5.2, why not, but I don't see the need, especially if 5.1 is the LTS one. But why not... > But not doing what we said about major releases is a big breakage of trust. Okay, maybe its just me, but I missed this decision, and I don't remember any discussions regarding it. Can you give me some pointers? Thanks, 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".