On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 5:05 PM, Reinhard Tartler <[email protected]>wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 21:49:52 (CEST), Måns Rullgård wrote:
>
> > Reinhard Tartler <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> With h264-mt having now landed, I think we are about ready to branch of
> >> 0.7. If anyone has another important change pending, now would be an
> >> excellent time to reply to this post ASAP.
> >>
> >> With the release approaching, let us consider how to properly tag the
> >> release and the commit that is used as base for the release branch.
> >>
> >> Option a:
> >>  - tag the branchpoint '0.7'
> >>  - create a new branch 'release/0.7'
> >>  - commit a RELEASE file '0.7rc1' as first commit
> >>  - use that to roll a rc1 tarball
> >>  - cherry pick changes necessary
> >>  - do the first release as '0.7.1'
> >>
> >> Pros with this approach:
> >>  - no freeze necessary, development in master can continue (this is the
> >>    mode we've used for 0.6)
> >>  - the version numbers of master continue to increase: git-0.7-1,
> >>    ... git-0.7-50, git-0.7-100, etc.
> >>
> >> Cons with this approach:
> >>  - on might it find misleading that the tag '0.7' does not constitute
> >>    the '0.7' release.
> >
> > I find this option unacceptable.  Tags must never lie.
> >
> >> Variant of Option a (Let's call it a'):
> >>  - tag the branchpoint '0.7'
> >>  - create a new branch 'release/0.7'
> >>  - commit a RELEASE file '0.7rc1' as first commit
> >>  - use that to roll a rc1 tarball
> >>  - cherry pick changes necessary
> >>  - do the first release as '0.7.0'
> >>
> >> Cons:
> >>  - Potential confusiong between '0.7.0' and '0.7'
> >>
> >> Option b:
> >>
> >>  - tag the branchpoint '0.7.0'
> >>  - create a new branch 'release/0.7'
> >>  - commit a RELEASE file '0.7rc1' as first commit
> >>  - use that to roll a rc1 tarball
> >>  - cherry pick changes necessary
> >>  - do the first release as '0.7.1'
> >>
> >> Pros with this approach:
> >>  - no freeze necessary, development in master can continue (this is the
> >>    mode we've used for 0.6)
> >>
> >> Cons with this approach:
> >>  - the version numbers of master continue to increase: git-0.7.0-1,
> >>    ... git-0.7.0-50, git-0.7.0-100, etc.
> >>  - people might be confused that git-0.7.1 might be 'higher'/'better'
> >>    than  git-0.7.0-250 (*)
> >
> > That numbering is weird.  Having both 0.7 and 0.7.0 tags will only cause
> > confusion.
> >
> >> Option c:
> >>
> >>  - announce a week of freezeing
> >>  - development focuses on fixing regressions only
> >>  - tag '0.7' in master
> >>  - create a new branch 'release/0.7'
> >>  - commit a RELEASE file '0.7rc1' as first commit
> >>  - use that to roll the 0.7 release tarball
> >>
> >> Pros with this approach:
> >>  - process is more(?) straight-forward
> >>  - the version numbers of master continue to increase: git-0.7-1,
> >>    ... git-0.7-50, git-0.7-100, etc.
> >>
> >> Cons with this approach:
> >>  - freeze necessary, development in master is slowed down
> >>  - people might be confused that git-0.7.1 might be 'higher'/'better'
> >>    than  git-0.7.0-250 (*)
> >
> > I don't mind a short freeze of master at all.  People can still develop
> > in their local branches, just like they already do (hopefully).
> >
> >> The issues marked with (*) could be mitigated by doing a 0.8b1 release
> >> before the 0.7.1 point release.
> >>
> >> I wonder how strongly people feel about c. In the discussions about
> >> the release processes during the 0.5 and 0.6 releases,
> >
> > We were using svn then, and a freeze would have had a much greater
> > impact on developers.
> >
> >> I had the impression that freezing trunk at that time was not very
> >> much welcomed among developers; has this changed in the mean time?
> >
> > We got rid of the ones who opposed the very notion of releases, let
> > alone a pre-release freeze.
> >
> > Do we have a list of important issues to fix before the release?
>
> AFAIUI, there are some libx264 wrapper option changes pending, Alex,
> Anton, could you please propose something that we can push into 0.7, and
> deliver the proper fix for 0.8 or if possible, for 0.7.1?
>
> What else do people really care about for having in 0.7?


I would like to have 10-bit H.264 assembly included. Right now it is
almost unusably slow.

I will probably have the code finished in under a month and a half.
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to