There have been some complains from developers about keeping both
SDL1 and SDL2 support at the same time even after all SDL1 code
has been already ported, and especially since it makes maintaining
ffplay more complex, so seeing the waters are divided I think the
best solution will be to vote.
Argu
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 02:36:32PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> There have been some complains from developers about keeping both
> SDL1 and SDL2 support at the same time even after all SDL1 code
> has been already ported, and especially since it makes maintaining
> ffplay more complex, so seeing th
2016-09-15 19:36 GMT+02:00 James Almer :
> There have been some complains from developers about keeping both
> SDL1 and SDL2 support at the same time even after all SDL1 code
> has been already ported,
Didn't we all agree yesterday that this makes the transition less painful?
> and especially sin
On 9/15/2016 2:51 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> 2016-09-15 19:36 GMT+02:00 James Almer :
>> There have been some complains from developers about keeping both
>> SDL1 and SDL2 support at the same time even after all SDL1 code
>> has been already ported,
>
> Didn't we all agree yesterday that this m
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 02:36:32PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> There have been some complains from developers about keeping both
> SDL1 and SDL2 support at the same time even after all SDL1 code
> has been already ported, and especially since it makes maintaining
> ffplay more complex, so seeing th
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 14:36:32 -0300, James Almer wrote:
> * SDL1 is old and effectively unmaintained.
I understand this verbatim, but what is it supposed to mean? Has SDL1
gotten rotten? Or more precisely:
- Has technology evolved, and the library not kept up?
- Is a long list of bugs (somehow
On 15.09.2016 23:19, Moritz Barsnick wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 14:36:32 -0300, James Almer wrote:
* SDL1 is old and effectively unmaintained.
I understand this verbatim, but what is it supposed to mean? Has SDL1
gotten rotten? Or more precisely:
- Has technology evolved, and the library
On 15/09/2016 22:28, Lukasz Marek wrote:
On 15.09.2016 23:19, Moritz Barsnick wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 14:36:32 -0300, James Almer wrote:
* SDL1 is old and effectively unmaintained.
I understand this verbatim, but what is it supposed to mean? Has SDL1
gotten rotten? Or more precisely:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 7:36 PM, James Almer wrote:
> There have been some complains from developers about keeping both
> SDL1 and SDL2 support at the same time even after all SDL1 code
> has been already ported, and especially since it makes maintaining
> ffplay more complex, so seeing the waters
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 11:19 PM, Moritz Barsnick wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 14:36:32 -0300, James Almer wrote:
>> * SDL1 is old and effectively unmaintained.
>
> I understand this verbatim, but what is it supposed to mean? Has SDL1
> gotten rotten? Or more precisely:
>
> - Has technology ev
On 15.09.2016 23:36, Josh de Kock wrote:
On 15/09/2016 22:28, Lukasz Marek wrote:
On 15.09.2016 23:19, Moritz Barsnick wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 14:36:32 -0300, James Almer wrote:
* SDL1 is old and effectively unmaintained.
I understand this verbatim, but what is it supposed to mean? Ha
On 15/09/2016 23:00, Lukasz Marek wrote:
On 15.09.2016 23:36, Josh de Kock wrote:
On 15/09/2016 22:28, Lukasz Marek wrote:
On 15.09.2016 23:19, Moritz Barsnick wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 14:36:32 -0300, James Almer wrote:
* SDL1 is old and effectively unmaintained.
I understand this ver
2016-09-15 19:55 GMT+02:00 James Almer :
> On 9/15/2016 2:51 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>> Didn't we all agree yesterday that this makes the transition
>> less painful?
>
> Not all. Several mentioned on IRC that they didn't like it.
So development discussion has moved to irc (again)?
> That's w
On 9/16/16, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> 2016-09-15 19:55 GMT+02:00 James Almer :
>> On 9/15/2016 2:51 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>
>>> Didn't we all agree yesterday that this makes the transition
>>> less painful?
>>
>> Not all. Several mentioned on IRC that they didn't like it.
>
> So development
2016-09-16 13:32 GMT+02:00 Paul B Mahol :
>>> That's why i started this vote, to see how many devs are
>>> effectively in favor or against and make the final decision
>>> official.
>>
>> A vote on how evil the FFmpeg community is wrt to
>> new (and existing) contributors? Seriously?
>
> Proof?
Wa
On 15 September 2016 at 18:36, James Almer wrote:
> There have been some complains from developers about keeping both
> SDL1 and SDL2 support at the same time even after all SDL1 code
> has been already ported, and especially since it makes maintaining
> ffplay more complex, so seeing the waters
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 8:01 AM, Carl Eugen Hoyos
wrote:
> 2016-09-16 13:32 GMT+02:00 Paul B Mahol :
>
> >>> That's why i started this vote, to see how many devs are
> >>> effectively in favor or against and make the final decision
> >>> official.
> >>
> >> A vote on how evil the FFmpeg comm
Hi folks,
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 1:36 PM, James Almer wrote:
> The vote will end 1 week from now, simple majority wins, and
> it's open only to those in the voting committee[1].
> Marton Balint, while not in the committee, should IMO also
> have the chance to vote or at least comment since he's
2016-09-16 14:21 GMT+02:00 Rostislav Pehlivanov :
> I'd rather have SDL1 support dropped. ffplay is the only thing on my
> machine which uses libsdl1.2
And we already (everybody) agreed that we want to switch to SDL2
so that you (and others) do not have to use (or depend on) sdl1
anymore.
But thi
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Carl Eugen Hoyos
wrote:
> Do we allow developers to continue to use sdl1 to test on their
> old (but supported) Linux distributions or do we forcibly stop
> them from contributing here?
All developers are welcome. You'll just have to install libsdl2 yoursel
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> 2016-09-16 14:21 GMT+02:00 Rostislav Pehlivanov :
>
>> I'd rather have SDL1 support dropped. ffplay is the only thing on my
>> machine which uses libsdl1.2
>
> And we already (everybody) agreed that we want to switch to SDL2
> so that you
2016-09-16 16:07 GMT+02:00 Hendrik Leppkes :
> You want other developers to do more work
Of which work are you talking about?
Carl Eugen
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:16 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos
wrote:
> 2016-09-16 16:07 GMT+02:00 Hendrik Leppkes :
>
> > You want other developers to do more work
>
> Of which work are you talking about?
Installing libsdl1.
Ronald
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing
2016-09-16 18:19 GMT+02:00 Ronald S. Bultje :
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:16 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos
> wrote:
>
>> 2016-09-16 16:07 GMT+02:00 Hendrik Leppkes :
>>
>> > You want other developers to do more work
>>
>> Of which work are you talking about?
>
> Installing libsdl1.
I don't unders
On 16/09/2016 17:22, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
2016-09-16 18:19 GMT+02:00 Ronald S. Bultje :
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:16 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos
wrote:
2016-09-16 16:07 GMT+02:00 Hendrik Leppkes :
You want other developers to do more work
Of which work are you talking about?
Installin
2016-09-16 18:24 GMT+02:00 Josh de Kock :
> On 16/09/2016 17:22, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>>
>> 2016-09-16 18:19 GMT+02:00 Ronald S. Bultje :
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:16 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos
>>> wrote:
>>>
2016-09-16 16:07 GMT+02:00 Hendrik Leppkes :
> You want other develop
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos
wrote:
> 2016-09-16 18:19 GMT+02:00 Ronald S. Bultje :
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:16 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos
> > wrote:
> >
> >> 2016-09-16 16:07 GMT+02:00 Hendrik Leppkes :
> >>
> >> > You want other developers to do more work
On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 14:36:32 -0300, James Almer wrote:
> There have been some complains from developers about keeping both
> SDL1 and SDL2 support at the same time even after all SDL1 code
> has been already ported, and especially since it makes maintaining
> ffplay more complex, so seeing the wat
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016 14:48:03 +0200
Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> 2016-09-16 14:21 GMT+02:00 Rostislav Pehlivanov :
>
> > I'd rather have SDL1 support dropped. ffplay is the only thing on my
> > machine which uses libsdl1.2
>
> And we already (everybody) agreed that we want to switch to SDL2
> so
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
Hi folks,
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 1:36 PM, James Almer wrote:
The vote will end 1 week from now, simple majority wins, and
it's open only to those in the voting committee[1].
Marton Balint, while not in the committee, should IMO also
have the cha
On 9/17/2016 5:26 PM, Marton Balint wrote:
>
> On Fri, 16 Sep 2016, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 1:36 PM, James Almer wrote:
>>
>>> The vote will end 1 week from now, simple majority wins, and
>>> it's open only to those in the voting committee[1].
>>> Mar
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 02:36:32PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> There have been some complains from developers about keeping both
> SDL1 and SDL2 support at the same time even after all SDL1 code
> has been already ported, and especially since it makes maintaining
> ffplay more complex, so seeing th
Hi,
On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 4:26 PM, Marton Balint wrote:
> I think we should wait until Lukasz does the port of the opengl device to
> SDL2, and do the switch after that.
When do we think that'll be finished?
Ronald
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ff
On Sep 18, 2016 04:57, "Ronald S. Bultje" wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 4:26 PM, Marton Balint wrote:
>
> > I think we should wait until Lukasz does the port of the opengl device
to
> > SDL2, and do the switch after that.
>
>
> When do we think that'll be finished?
I missed this, I
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 9:47 PM, Lukasz Marek
wrote:
> On Sep 18, 2016 04:57, "Ronald S. Bultje" wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 4:26 PM, Marton Balint wrote:
> >
> > > I think we should wait until Lukasz does the port of the opengl device
> to
> > > SDL2, and do the swi
On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 14:36:32 -0300
James Almer wrote:
> There have been some complains from developers about keeping both
> SDL1 and SDL2 support at the same time even after all SDL1 code
> has been already ported, and especially since it makes maintaining
> ffplay more complex, so seeing the wat
On 9/15/2016 2:36 PM, James Almer wrote:
> There have been some complains from developers about keeping both
> SDL1 and SDL2 support at the same time even after all SDL1 code
> has been already ported, and especially since it makes maintaining
> ffplay more complex, so seeing the waters are divided
37 matches
Mail list logo
