On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 01:46:27PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote: > It does not mean that we intend to break the order of options > at a whim, but it gives us more freedom to make necessary > changes without extra unnecessary burden while giving stability > to users that require it. [...]
I'd rather make such changes justified and documented as exceptional in the Changelog (or in APIchanges) when we can't get around it cleanly, than documenting a free for all area. You're saying documenting the risk or potential changes helps us make changes more easily with more transparency, but no matter the wording, to me it looks like it's going to be a slippery slope where developers interpret it differently and will abuse that declared rule whenever possible. Indeed, it's the perfect defense against users and other developers when breaking the interface. So yeah, I'm in favor of "no API breakage" (of course, major version bumps allow to bypass this), whatever the form, and we can always make documented exceptions for obscures options after a discussion. -- Clément B.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
