On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 03:16:01PM -0400, Stephen Hutchinson wrote: > On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 02:33:28PM -0400, Stephen Hutchinson wrote: > > > From: d s <[email protected]> > > > > Who is that? > > The author of the majority of the patch. They're the main committer to > AvxSynth.
Can we have a name to go along with that? > >> So what's stopping us from requiring 2.6.0? AFAICT that would eliminate > >> several of the issues still present in your patch. > > > > From a user perspective Avisynth 2.6 has many more features and > > options (my recommendation is that everyone should upgrade); from a > > developer perspective supporting 2.6 only would improve the quality of > > the patch and avoid deprecating a lot of old code when 2.5.8 reaches > > EOL. > > So I completely agree with Diego here. > > Truthfully, I only ever use 2.6 these days; it was complaints about the > rewritten demuxer not working with 2.5.8 (more specifically, it's video > that doesn't work with it due to the API changes between 2.5 and > 2.6...audio works fine through it without any special handling) that made > me get that part worked out. But I agree that trying to get 2.6 tested and > out is in the best interest. > > I can go ahead and put in the check and drop support for 2.5.8. Go ahead. Diego _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
