On Fri, 4 Mar 2016 14:44:28 -0800 Timothy Gu <timothyg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So after all the email exchanges, I think there are certain things > that our version SHOULD contain: > > - The hash > - The next release (i.e. n3.1) > - A way to compare two versions > > The date is considered to be "good" but perhaps not as necessary. the problem i've seen when helping users when the date is inside the version string (in mplayer) is that the idiot distros build an old mplayer 1.1-2016-01-01 right? except mplayer 1.1 was released 3 years ago. in 2013. they just built a 3 year old tarball two months ago and users install it like it was new! which is why ffmpeg and mplayer have the copyright year in the version string to help. slightly. assuming distros dont mess with it. > > Any objections? > should put it up to a vote what devs and users want to see. otherwise its just a few vocal devs on the list dictating it for everyone :P -compn _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
