[FFmpeg-devel] 2.9/3.0, 2.8.5, ...
andreas.cadhalpun at googlemail.com
Sat Jan 2 17:16:51 CET 2016
On 02.01.2016 17:12, James Almer wrote:
> On 1/2/2016 8:42 AM, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote:
>> On 01.01.2016 15:19, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>> Its a while since 2.8 so unless there are objections i will make a
>>> 2.9 or if people prefer a 3.0 within the next month or so
>> I think using 3.0 would better due to the backwards incompatible
>> API changes.
>> We should do this always to give the major version a defined meaning.
>> That way we would use semantic versioning.
> We didn't for 2.4, which also had a project wide major bump.
Yes, but I think it would have been better.
> And really,
> those who care about ABI breaks (distros) and library versions (distros
> and API users) don't care about the arbitrary version of the ffmpeg
> package as a whole.
> Some time ago it was argued that the ffmpeg version should for example
> get a major bump when some considerable changes were made to the CLI
> tools. Users that download ffmpeg and don't care about the libraries
> look at that version, and they are the ones affected by all and any
> changes made to command line options for those tools.
But this is a quite arbitrary thing, as the command line interface
has lots of changes in every version.
> Personally I'd call this one 2.9, and then the next can be 3.0 instead
> of 2.10.
That way the major version has no meaning at all.
More information about the ffmpeg-devel