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 DD5F642694 for ; Mon, 25 Apr 2022 18:39:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.1.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id A412D68B064; Mon, 25 Apr 2022 21:39:00 +0300 (EEST) Received: from mail-oa1-f44.google.com (mail-oa1-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3422568A302 for ; Mon, 25 Apr 2022 21:38:53 +0300 (EEST) Received: by mail-oa1-f44.google.com with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-e93ff05b23so3895765fac.9 for ; Mon, 25 Apr 2022 11:38:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:content-language:to :references:from:subject:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ONUTqJhdv/PM5EKflLz638bj3zNqjPPkb1EvJPHDmIQ=; b=mp7G8+/fU+BRhLpVJ6iKmbJNCZF3c7R3u3/F5nDe6LVXqIE5UI+8vDeRB8b/YSak25 Owlk+v43umHAMygR7+foIIe2zqB+JwwrXgyum4mNWTVuSWYHqeU87LUB5p5aiXMbGT8U RFgwk8P7J8aSxHHYt0fTDcmu2hdok1LfE+uafYhQzUH1deHo2hzbQw+u9ywx4FOh8n0o XzMEFjtZuOmgOJJnbw5KtAObxQEs5V5Uaah0bHfctvKZv0s1IjFHG7itSOzpRIME+fAt Ow7lPYpuqscCMPj3TVFnX+gQYgxifyjqbX+637eccMeQ1qQELj5IW8NaslIJlnRJVfNE 4rew== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent :content-language:to:references:from:subject:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ONUTqJhdv/PM5EKflLz638bj3zNqjPPkb1EvJPHDmIQ=; b=qYn6ucYYnCAlq7+lYYVOc3WGc0Q18fx1WuirRQVampKI8M87Cl6+UXtvGxKSbEza1O Bf6JSXeQ+Ta11bOW5nYCW0zRMqX+3vKTSLsWEoPPJN/1w7pflabGDyefJPLBhUlhqn4O ZGD8Y1UzUQH6w5KNgXltv5i/ps9gBhZRC2jehT0Jp0ZtV5UJ8orn4HnJI/5290qkqShp jv21Bx2YbMA0qFO0IMJUTTniqoWgvj8mqnlsk8YaMKlFUhA78gmi6R+8fn4Dw6S6eAEh LkWK88CEfmSm1zad0o235FwDTHx38qDqXd1v+4a+Xzcyb8+Zd3Of19mMyoNbALeTROln WW/Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5321Aex1Ku4Z7pAlUVkEVYfOp+tJVxMQh+zP1B3E4aOMuA4joNwP cqMKQNB554+wCTp32/7YxpytCJDSnOE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwGtduLGtV4yqeQQ0BTRXjbG8nWfuP7DkX6R7LYisLnygzASrgax+pBX1rJjnjLw1k+nxpWoA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:328b:b0:e2:6f09:87f0 with SMTP id q11-20020a056870328b00b000e26f0987f0mr12184058oac.62.1650911930453; Mon, 25 Apr 2022 11:38:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.13] ([186.136.131.95]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l15-20020a056808020f00b003227922d2b6sm4019972oie.11.2022.04.25.11.38.49 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 25 Apr 2022 11:38:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2022 15:38:48 -0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.8.1 Content-Language: en-US To: ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org References: <20220423163611.GX2829255@pb2> <9c39d56f-9cf0-4f81-9e13-4bc1034cac3b@beta.fastmail.com> <20220425171946.GY2829255@pb2> From: James Almer In-Reply-To: <20220425171946.GY2829255@pb2> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] FFmpeg 5.0 LTS vs 5.1 LTS 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 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".