On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 11:44:55PM -0300, James Almer wrote: > On 6/29/2016 9:47 PM, James Almer wrote: > > On 6/29/2016 9:16 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > >> Hendrik Leppkes <h.leppkes <at> gmail.com> writes: > >> > >>> Plenty previous releases moved fields that were marked as "no direct > >>> access", usually because libav added a new field above the > >>> ffmpeg-exclusive ones (like AVFrame.channels, which is a common > >>> candidate), and we didn't do such a song and dance to accomodate > >>> everyone. > >> > >>> I asked this in other threads before - why this time? > >> > >> I thought the difference is that for all other fields > >> we offered accessors that the API users could use to > >> access the fields. > >> > >> Carl Eugen > > > > They have accessors. All the private fields in AVFrame have accessors. > > The issue is that at least three projects weren't using them, and things > > broke for them as soon as the private fields moved. > > > > This patch here attempts to break our ABI to accommodate the fact said > > projects weren't using the accessors, when the real solution for distros > > is to rebuild said packages targeting 3.1 and for those projects to use > > the accessors. > > > > One of them (Kodi) already fixed their code[1], for that matter. > > > > [1] https://github.com/xbmc/xbmc/pull/10043 > > For the record, if it really comes to it (distros not wanting to recompile > or update the broken downstream packages, or more packages found misusing > this api thus making adoption of 3.1 a PITA) I'm willing to concede and let
mlt too breaks with 3.1 https://trac.ffmpeg.org/ticket/5676 [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible. -- Voltaire
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
