On sab, nov 29, 2014 at 01:58:06 -0200, Rogério Brito wrote: > Hi, Alessandro. > > On Nov 28 2014, Alessandro Ghedini wrote: > > could you please package the new youtube-dl upstream version (2014.11.27 as > > of > > now)? This will be needed by the new mpv version I'm preparing, which added > > support for playing YouTube videos and similar by using youtube-dl instead > > of > > libquvi. > > Sure, I am already planning a new upload, but there is a catch: youtube-dl > changes way, way too much almost every day and they don't have stable > releases, which means that whenever it breaks, I would have a hard time > having the release team to accept updates.
Note that the mpv version that uses youtube-dl hasn't been uploaded to Debian yet, and it will definitely *not* be in jessie, so I'm not much concerned about it right now. > It is essentially infeasible to try to hunt which patches to apply to fix > the numerous sites that break (and we can be pretty sure that a lot of them > will break, especially youtube---which is one of the main purposes of the > package, after all). youtube-dl supports a pretty big number of websites, a lot of which very few people actually use, so it would IMO be better to prepare new stable uploads when users actually complain (i.e. file bug reports). In that case I think it would be significantly easier to pin down the problem to a particular upstream commit and then backport it. > So, if you could help convince the release team (and the stable release > team) to accept new uploads instead of insisting in only minimal patches to > fix what is broken (which would be like finding a needle in a haystack), > then I'd love it. I don't know about convincing the release team, but if stable uploads are a problem for you I can help with those. It may even be worth moving youtube-dl maintainance under the Multimedia Team umbrella. Now is probably not a good time, but as soon as jessie is released (or once a problem in the stable youtube-dl arises), we can also discuss doing whole release uploads to stable with the RT (as long as the command-line interface or the configuration options don't change I doubt they would be against this). Cheers
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
