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. I would Bump and prepare 6.0 just after, no? -- 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".
