On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 11:43 PM, Andreas Cadhalpun <andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On 24.08.2015 13:44, Vittorio Giovara wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 6:54 PM, Luca Barbato <lu_z...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>> On 28/07/15 15:41, Vittorio Giovara wrote: >>>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Luca Barbato <lu_z...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>>>> On 28/07/15 15:30, Vittorio Giovara wrote: >> I believe to see general consensus towards applying the set as is. > > There is no consensus for that.
There is, consensus does not need to be unanimous, and so far only you have been expressing concerns (multiple times). >> I've added a skeleton to the wiki >> (https://wiki.libav.org/Migration/12) so that we can properly document >> the necessary changes before we release. Any help with that is of >> course welcome. > > I have a work-in-progress API-porting-guide. if you're talking about the patch set you sent it, I don't believe it's a good idea adding yet-another-doc-file to the tree, it mostly duplicates APIChanges and its contents are much better off on a wiki, where it can be quickly updated and edited. Your efforts are indeed commendable and I look forward to seeing the wiki page I linked filled with documentation. >> If no objections I'll push this set in the following days. > > Can you explain why you believe it makes any kind of sense to remove > widely used APIs like FF_API_PIX_FMT/FF_API_AVCODEC_FRAME, while > keeping completely useless ones like FF_API_MISSING_SAMPLE? I was afraid someone would point out it's less than two years old. Jokes aside, missing_sample can go as well if you insist, while for the other two you mention do you have any other argument than being "widely used"? I believe we went over and over explaining why it's a good a idea to remove those, not sure how beneficial it is to iterate once again. Regards. -- Vittorio _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
