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. -- 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-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
