On Friday, 02 September 2011 at 12:29, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
Without further arguments, I still consider doing such update in
as a violation of the fedora's
As we follow fedora's guidelines as we can with the exception of the
licensing, I just confirm that this policy applies to RPM Fusion too.
Quoting, "As a result, we should avoid major updates of packages
within a stable release"
I don't consider this a major update. It is both ABI and API compatible
with what we have in F-14 and it carries security fixes which the older
release doesn't have. Not to mention some very attractive features like
frame-level multithreaded h264 decoding. If you want to cherry-pick and
backport only the security patches from FFmpeg git, be my guest, but
I think it is too much work and unnecessary, considering that 0.7 branch
is API and ABI compatible.
And if you recall my first e-mail on this subject, all the rebuilds
I did in F-14 were not strictly necessary, because there's no API or ABI
breakage. All build failures occured because the packages haven't been
rebuilt for a long time.
So at the fist step, there is a need to have the change reverted, so
If another ffmpeg dependency in fedora break it's ABI for any reason,
we can rebuilt ffmpeg/x264 with the same version as the one already in
Why would there be an ABI-breaking change in F-14? That would be against
the updates policy...
Then I'm not necessarily against the idea, but I would like to
Pro/Con from other maintainers of multimedia packages, after something
has landed in f15 for some time.
Sure. Now that I'm done with devel/F-16, I'll move on to F-15. However,
I think I did all the work already for F-14 and there will be no
| MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"