Mailing List Archive

Using FFmpeg master instead of release branches
Hello all,

I am currently merging the FFmpeg changes until the branch point of
FFmpeg 5.1 and I was wondering if we could just use the master branch of
FFmpeg instead of the release branches.

My reasoning is as follows:

1. We do not add the commits to our "release" branch that FFmpeg does
after its initial release.
2. My understanding is that you are supposed to be able to use FFmpeg
at any point on the master branch.


Regards,

Scott
Re: Using FFmpeg master instead of release branches [ In reply to ]
On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 at 05:45, Scott Theisen <scott.the.elm@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I am currently merging the FFmpeg changes until the branch point of FFmpeg 5.1 and I was wondering if we could just use the master branch of FFmpeg instead of the release branches.
>
> My reasoning is as follows:
>
> We do not add the commits to our "release" branch that FFmpeg does after its initial release.
> My understanding is that you are supposed to be able to use FFmpeg at any point on the master branch.

It may help for future major rebase/update.

But FFmpeg's API changes a lot and often.
So by using a release branch, you can easily backports all the
security updates and fixes without ever having to worry about breaking
the APIs.
If you're tracking master, you're in a lot of pain to cherry-pick the
only stuff you need.

My $0.02
_______________________________________________
mythtv-dev mailing list
mythtv-dev@mythtv.org
http://lists.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-dev
http://wiki.mythtv.org/Mailing_List_etiquette
MythTV Forums: https://forum.mythtv.org
Re: Using FFmpeg master instead of release branches [ In reply to ]
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 10:04 AM Jean-Yves Avenard <jyavenard@gmail.com> wrote:

> But FFmpeg's API changes a lot and often.

In *theory* FFmpeg 5.0 was supposed to have
a (mostly) stable API as an LTS release(*).

However, it should be noted, that even the
FFmpeg devs stated they were not sure how
successful that intent was going to be in
practice (as it was their first attempt at a
LTS release approach).

And, of course, if a consumer (such as
MythTV) continues to need access to
private/internal functions things will
continue to stay complicated (and for
such consumers either upstreaming
their changes, or getting equivalent
functionality added, should be a goal).



(*) They were trying to accommodate the
repeated (and sometimes loud) complaints
that the API was continuously changing,
causing consumers of the library
substantial issues. A number of APIs
were stated to have changed with 5.0 in
order to try to rationalize what and how
functionality is exposed.
_______________________________________________
mythtv-dev mailing list
mythtv-dev@mythtv.org
http://lists.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-dev
http://wiki.mythtv.org/Mailing_List_etiquette
MythTV Forums: https://forum.mythtv.org