[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: wheezy update for libav

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 10:25:31AM +0200, Hugo Lefeuvre wrote:
> Hi Diego,
> > I just did the 0.8.18 release (not announced on the website yet). You
> > can grab tarballs etc. from
> >
> > https://www.libav.org/releases/
> > 
> > Compared to the previous release from the 0.8 branch, this contains some
> > bug fixes and I integrated some local patches from your Debian package.
> > 
> > Let me know how creating a new Debian package from my release works out
> > for you.
> Thanks for your work.
> Did you included fixes for the issue mentioned here[0] ?
> [0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts/2016/09/msg00211.html

No, I haven't, I just pushed a set to the 9 branch that fixed the
problem. I tried the first patch in the series, it's very far from
applying cleanly, so backporting the work looks like annoying and
tedious work. I can add it to the ToDo list, but I cannot guarantee
success before looking into it more closely.

2016-09-28 3:04 GMT+02:00 Jean-Yves Avenard <jya@mozilla.com>:
> There's also the matter that none from LibAV was willing to help on the
> matter. They have stopped supporting 54 over 3 years ago and appeared very
> annoyed that it had been added to a LTS release. It came down to:" why
> should we help when no-one is willing to pay for our support"
> This is why we had to do the work ourselves for 54. They reluctantly
> accepted to merge our changes in their tree and made it clear that they
> would provide no support for it.

I'd also like to comment on Jean-Yves' remarks about (non-)cooperation:
We simply don't have the manpower to maintain old branches. We do not
get paid to do it (I'm the exception now) and we don't use these old
branches. As the day only has 24 hours and motivation is limited, people
tend to work on new code and improving the current codebase; that's more
fun and moves the codebase forward, benefitting everybody.

For those reasons, when paid devs like Mozilla's appear sort of demanding
bug fixes for ancient code, then the reception is somewhat less than
enthusiastic. We just can't please everybody, much less in our free time
and at the expense of current development work. I hope you can
understand that.


P.S.: I have no idea who started adding the weird capitals into LibAV,
but the wrong spelling appears to catch on. Please just spell it "libav"
or "Libav"; we consciously decided to have no weird capitalization in
the name when we changed the name of the project from FFmpeg.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: