On 1/25/23, Jean-Baptiste Kempf <j...@videolan.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, 25 Jan 2023, at 22:29, Paul B Mahol wrote: >> On 1/25/23, Jean-Baptiste Kempf <j...@videolan.org> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Wed, 25 Jan 2023, at 22:20, Paul B Mahol wrote: >>>> On 1/25/23, Jean-Baptiste Kempf <j...@videolan.org> 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. >>>> >>>> So user do not need to immediately update code that uses old API to >>>> get new fancy features. >>> >>> And when do you stop doing this? >> >> After 6.0 tagged. >> >>> Also, as 5.1 is LTS, is 5.2 LTS too? >>> >> >> No, its not. > > So, we tag 5.2 out of master? > Then bump, and tag 6.0 too? And then branch out 6.0?
Yes, with all old API support removed. This is the new way! > > -- > 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". > _______________________________________________ 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".
