On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 04:57:45PM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote: > On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 09:42:23PM -0800, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Derek Buitenhuis > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 15/12/2011 9:21 AM, Anton Khirnov wrote: > > >> > > >> I see no point in pretending it's a part of Libav, when it's clearly > > >> not. Nobody has maintained it since forever and apparrently nobody wants > > >> to. > > >> Let's get rid of it, whoever uses it can pull it from history. > > > > > > > > > Some things that use it, like FFMS2, have started deprecating > > > their postproc-based stuff. IMHO it should probably be considered > > > a legacy lib, and moved somewhere else (a separate repo, not > > > maintained by Libav, perhaps), rather than nuked completely out > > > of existence. > > > > Diego, are you interested in doing this? > > It's not clear to me what exactly is expected to be done. > Create a clone of Libav, delete all subdirectories and strip the build > system down to only support what's necessary to build libpostproc?
Yes, an old close (with less dependencies on lavu) should be fine. And we don't need a perfect solution, reasonably working one is fine. _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
