Pau Garcia i Quiles <pgqui...@elpauer.org> writes: > If libav and ffmpeg maintainers cannot reach an agreement regarding > library names and it's not possible to simply use either ffmpeg or libav > indistinctly due missing features binary compatibility, etc, the obvious > solution is that BOTH libav and ffmpeg rename their libraries in > Debian. E. g. libavcodec-ffmpeg.so and libavcodec-libav.so, etc. Maybe > even use alternatives to provide the binaries (ffmpeg, ffplay, > etc). It's been done in the past.
None of this is why libav and FFmpeg can't both be in the archive. They can't both be in the archive because both the release team and the security team have said that they're not interested in trying to support both, due to the amount of work involved. All the renaming and cordial co-existence in the world won't change this. The things that would change this is for one or both projects to develop a better security track record and a history of higher-quality code releases that require less ongoing work in stable, or for the people who care deeply about this to somehow find a way to relieve the impact on those teams in some way acceptable to those teams. Short of that, there's clearly a need for software of this type in Debian, and at the same time it's clearly a ton of work. The teams involved have indicated that they're willing (if not necessarily happy) to deal with one version of the source base, but not two. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/878umobdj5....@hope.eyrie.org
