Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 11:36 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > > 2019-02-20 20:56 GMT+01:00, Lou Logan : > > On Wed, Feb 6, 2019, at 11:48 AM, Werner Robitza wrote: > >> > >> I propose that FFmpeg maintains its own ffmpeg formula under its > >> GitHub organization at github.com/ffmpeg/homebrew-ffmpeg (or similar). > >> This will ensure that there's one formula users will discover when > >> they look for an alternative tap, thus improving discoverability and > >> avoiding fragmentation. We could use the above link as a starting > >> point. > > > > The alternative tap originally proposed by Werner went ahead independently > > and has been implemented at: > > https://github.com/varenc/homebrew-ffmpeg > > Great! > Should we add this link to the download page? I'd wait until we have a proper CI pipeline in place. Right now we're testing manually. I wouldn't want to directly link to a build script that has not fully been automatically tested on macOS/Linux. Once that is done, I'll provide a patch to add the link. ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
2019-02-20 20:56 GMT+01:00, Lou Logan : > On Wed, Feb 6, 2019, at 11:48 AM, Werner Robitza wrote: >> >> I propose that FFmpeg maintains its own ffmpeg formula under its >> GitHub organization at github.com/ffmpeg/homebrew-ffmpeg (or similar). >> This will ensure that there's one formula users will discover when >> they look for an alternative tap, thus improving discoverability and >> avoiding fragmentation. We could use the above link as a starting >> point. > > The alternative tap originally proposed by Werner went ahead independently > and has been implemented at: > https://github.com/varenc/homebrew-ffmpeg Great! Should we add this link to the download page? Carl Eugen ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Wed, Feb 6, 2019, at 11:48 AM, Werner Robitza wrote: > > I propose that FFmpeg maintains its own ffmpeg formula under its > GitHub organization at github.com/ffmpeg/homebrew-ffmpeg (or similar). > This will ensure that there's one formula users will discover when > they look for an alternative tap, thus improving discoverability and > avoiding fragmentation. We could use the above link as a starting > point. The alternative tap originally proposed by Werner went ahead independently and has been implemented at: https://github.com/varenc/homebrew-ffmpeg So if you're a Homebrew user looking for a formulae with additional options not present in the core Homebrew ffmpeg formulae you can use this tap. More info is available in the community wiki: https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/CompilationGuide/macOS#Additionaloptions Note that this tap is not maintained by or associated with FFmpeg. ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Sun, Feb 10, 2019 at 7:40 PM Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > > On Sun, 10 Feb 2019, at 19:37, Werner Robitza wrote: > > > Those options are just for non-free cases, and to be honest, I don't see > > > why FFmpeg should advertise those. > > > > That is not correct. The following options/dependencies are not > > present in Homebrew core: > > > > chromaprint, fdk-aac, game-music-emu, libbs2b, libcaca, libgsm, > > libmodplug, librsvg, libssh, libvidstab, libvmaf, openh264, openssl, > > srt, two-lame, wavpack, webp, zeromq, zimg > > Fair enough. > I still object to an official recipe activating non-free options. If that is the major concern, I suggest to remove these two options from the formula as a way forward. Of course, anyone would be free to provide their own non-free repository if they desire so. ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Sun, 10 Feb 2019, at 19:37, Werner Robitza wrote: > > Those options are just for non-free cases, and to be honest, I don't see > > why FFmpeg should advertise those. > > That is not correct. The following options/dependencies are not > present in Homebrew core: > > chromaprint, fdk-aac, game-music-emu, libbs2b, libcaca, libgsm, > libmodplug, librsvg, libssh, libvidstab, libvmaf, openh264, openssl, > srt, two-lame, wavpack, webp, zeromq, zimg Fair enough. I still object to an official recipe activating non-free options. -- Jean-Baptiste Kempf - President +33 672 704 734 ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 11:59 PM Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > > On Sat, 9 Feb 2019, at 11:59, Werner Robitza wrote: > > Then the only consequence can be to remove these options or support > > for these libraries altogether, because you'll find plenty of guides > > and recommendations on how to build ffmpeg with non-free libs on the > > Internet – even supplied by members who are very active in the FFmpeg > > community. It is certainly your prerogative to be against explicit > > advertising, but where do you draw the line? Has there been any > > precedent with this, or is this going to be decided on a case-by-case > > basis? > > > > The only consequence would be a formula that is not owned and > > controlled by FFmpeg, and people will continue to build non-free > > binaries. > > But then, it is not the project, doing it, but someone else. The project won't be building non-free binaries and ship those to people. It's the users who will do it on their machine. > To come back to the main topic, you can have a full FFmpeg in homebrew with > all the libraries activated by default, if you want, without any issue. No, that's not the case. > I therefore do not see at all the need for options. They are needed since not everyone wants or needs a full-featured ffmpeg with all third-party libraries. There can be sane defaults, like there have been for years, and some libraries can be enabled optionally. > Those options are just for non-free cases, and to be honest, I don't see why > FFmpeg should advertise those. That is not correct. The following options/dependencies are not present in Homebrew core: chromaprint, fdk-aac, game-music-emu, libbs2b, libcaca, libgsm, libmodplug, librsvg, libssh, libvidstab, libvmaf, openh264, openssl, srt, two-lame, wavpack, webp, zeromq, zimg ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Sat, 9 Feb 2019, at 11:59, Werner Robitza wrote: > You could print an even more obvious warning message when these > options are used. > If that is a big concern, it can be easily dealt with. > > > And yes, I strongly advise against the project advertising those non-free > > options. > > Then the only consequence can be to remove these options or support > for these libraries altogether, because you'll find plenty of guides > and recommendations on how to build ffmpeg with non-free libs on the > Internet – even supplied by members who are very active in the FFmpeg > community. It is certainly your prerogative to be against explicit > advertising, but where do you draw the line? Has there been any > precedent with this, or is this going to be decided on a case-by-case > basis? > > The only consequence would be a formula that is not owned and > controlled by FFmpeg, and people will continue to build non-free > binaries. But then, it is not the project, doing it, but someone else. To come back to the main topic, you can have a full FFmpeg in homebrew with all the libraries activated by default, if you want, without any issue. I therefore do not see at all the need for options. Those options are just for non-free cases, and to be honest, I don't see why FFmpeg should advertise those. -- Jean-Baptiste Kempf - President +33 672 704 734 ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 10:18 PM Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > > On Fri, 8 Feb 2019, at 22:08, Lou Logan wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019, at 11:27 AM, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > > > > > > Also, the AUR recipe does not push for non-free packages. > > > > The proposed homebrew formulae will not push for non-free packages. It > > will simply provide the options for the user to enable two non-free > > components (openssh and fdk-aac currently) if they desire. They have to > > be explicitly enabled by the user by manually including the appropriate > > option, such as "--with-fdk-aac". > > Yes, and this is exactly what I am objecting against. > It silently enables non-free, when you ask either. See L 146 and following. You could print an even more obvious warning message when these options are used. If that is a big concern, it can be easily dealt with. > And yes, I strongly advise against the project advertising those non-free > options. Then the only consequence can be to remove these options or support for these libraries altogether, because you'll find plenty of guides and recommendations on how to build ffmpeg with non-free libs on the Internet – even supplied by members who are very active in the FFmpeg community. It is certainly your prerogative to be against explicit advertising, but where do you draw the line? Has there been any precedent with this, or is this going to be decided on a case-by-case basis? The only consequence would be a formula that is not owned and controlled by FFmpeg, and people will continue to build non-free binaries. Werner ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 10:03:36AM +0100, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > Hello, > > On Wed, 6 Feb 2019, at 21:41, Werner Robitza wrote: > > Homebrew has, with its 2.0 release, removed all options for its core > > formulae [1], including ffmpeg. This means users can no longer add > > non-default dependencies that aren't included in the core formula [2]. > > > I propose that FFmpeg maintains its own ffmpeg formula under its > > GitHub organization at github.com/ffmpeg/homebrew-ffmpeg (or similar). > > Why do something special for homebrew, and not for all the other > distributions? I dont think anyone suggested that. Any other "distribution" should be treated equal. I think homebrew is the first to suggest to have something put on git*/ffmpeg. Whatever we do (or do not do) here we should do the same if another distro is in a similar situation and asks too. > Why is homebrew different? Are you going to merge all .spec files from all > Linux distributions too? > > > That creates a bit of a messy situation, as users are expecting to be > > able to build ffmpeg with additional libraries, including nonfree ones > > such as fdk-aac. This is no longer easily doable. > > Helping people to build non-free distributions of FFmpeg is a very weird and > dubious goal. > This is just helping other people violate the FFmpeg license. obviously, that should not be done. And i would have thought that this also was not the goal > > > Please let me know your thoughts. > > Do not use Github to develop. Github is not-free. Use Github to mirror, if > you want, but not to develop. i would suggest that too. thanks [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB You can kill me, but you cannot change the truth. signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Fri, 8 Feb 2019, at 22:08, Lou Logan wrote: > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019, at 11:27 AM, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > > > > Also, the AUR recipe does not push for non-free packages. > > The proposed homebrew formulae will not push for non-free packages. It > will simply provide the options for the user to enable two non-free > components (openssh and fdk-aac currently) if they desire. They have to > be explicitly enabled by the user by manually including the appropriate > option, such as "--with-fdk-aac". Yes, and this is exactly what I am objecting against. It silently enables non-free, when you ask either. See L 146 and following. And yes, I strongly advise against the project advertising those non-free options. > > Source code requires compilation and steps. You must know what you are > > doing when you enable --non-free, after cloning the source. > > Not if it is done automatically in homebrew or another way. > > I do not believe the homebrew recipe will automatically enable any non- > free components. Refer to "def install" in the draft formulae provided > by Werner in this thread. See above and lines 146 and so on. -- Jean-Baptiste Kempf - President +33 672 704 734 ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Fri, Feb 8, 2019, at 11:27 AM, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > > Also, the AUR recipe does not push for non-free packages. The proposed homebrew formulae will not push for non-free packages. It will simply provide the options for the user to enable two non-free components (openssh and fdk-aac currently) if they desire. They have to be explicitly enabled by the user by manually including the appropriate option, such as "--with-fdk-aac". > Source code requires compilation and steps. You must know what you are > doing when you enable --non-free, after cloning the source. > Not if it is done automatically in homebrew or another way. I do not believe the homebrew recipe will automatically enable any non-free components. Refer to "def install" in the draft formulae provided by Werner in this thread. ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Fri, 8 Feb 2019, at 21:18, Lou Logan wrote: > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019, at 12:03 AM, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > > > > Helping people to build non-free distributions of FFmpeg is a very weird > > and dubious goal. > > This is just helping other people violate the FFmpeg license. > > You could say the same thing for other build scripts such as the AUR for > Arch Linux. It's just a tool. Tools can be misused. Yes, but it is not FFmpeg that is maintaining this AUR recipe. Also, the AUR recipe does not push for non-free packages. > You could apply the same argument to our source code. Having --enable- > nonfree in the source code helpspeople violate the license. But that's a > completely different discussion. Source code requires compilation and steps. You must know what you are doing when you enable --non-free, after cloning the source. Not if it is done automatically in homebrew or another way. > > Do not use Github to develop. Github is not-free. > > I believe there are three reasons for the Github suggestion. > > 1. It makes the homebrew command trivially shorter/simpler for the user: > https://docs.brew.sh/How-to-Create-and-Maintain-a-Tap > > 2. More importantly, a question for those who volunteered (and > potentially future contributors), would you be less inclined to maintain > via a normal, non-Github git repo? Would the typical homebrew user know > where to report issues? Where would they report issues? It's unfortunate > that Github is not free, but we need to take account of the differences > between communities and experience. > > 3. Someone is going to make this ffmpeg "formulae" (as they call it) > which will become the most popular one among users. I bet it's most > certainly going to be on Github. I think it's better that we have some > ability to be able to edit it. All those 3 reasons are fine, but they do not change the fact that they get the project to support this officially. It's also by doing those choice like 2) that you accept binary-loaders for codecs, instead of RE-ing them: "because the user wants it". If someone wants to do a Tap for homebrew, because the homebrew people decided to disregard their own users, I don't mind. But supporting it from the official FFmpeg project is a very different task, and if done, it should be done with open source tools (use gitlab if you like github so much), and without the evil options. -- Jean-Baptiste Kempf - President +33 672 704 734 ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Fri, 8 Feb 2019, at 19:06, Werner Robitza wrote: > Hello, > > Thanks for your comments. > > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 10:03 AM Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > > Why do something special for homebrew, and not for all the other > > distributions? > > Why is homebrew different? Are you going to merge all .spec files from all > > Linux distributions too? > > I don't think it's really productive to talk about other Linux > distributions in this thread. That is really a different topic. A contrario, this is the exact same topic. Homebrew 2.0 is now cross-platform and is just a distribution packaging like any other "ports". I don't see why this project should put one distribution mechanism before another. Why not MSys2, why not Chocolatey, why not a BSD port? Those are not linux distributions. What about macports, which is also on OSX, like Homebrew? I disagree that there is something so special in Homebrew, that warrants it to be an exception to all the other distribution systems, especially since now Homebrew competes will all the other distribution systems. > > > That creates a bit of a messy situation, as users are expecting to be > > > able to build ffmpeg with additional libraries, including nonfree ones > > > such as fdk-aac. This is no longer easily doable. > > > > Helping people to build non-free distributions of FFmpeg is a very weird > > and dubious goal. > > This is just helping other people violate the FFmpeg license. > > That is a matter of personal viewpoint contrasted with general opinion > about non-free FFmpeg, which I am 1) probably not the right person to > discuss with, given my lack of presence on this mailing list and 2) > the fact that the proposed formula simply mirrors what is already > possible. I may be missing the full picture or developer consensus > about how to handle this. I understand that there are folks who are > very passionate about this topic, and that others are not. I can only > observe that end users have the technical possibilities to build > FFmpeg in a non-free and non-redistributable fashion. I don't see why > it would be necessary to artificially restrict users in doing so. Those are 2 different things: - artificially restrict users in doing something, - advertising and encouraging those capabilities and behaviors. You can allow the users to do something, see the ffmpeg configure. But advertising and encouraging those officially (from an official Github account) is very different. -- Jean-Baptiste Kempf - President +33 672 704 734 ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Fri, Feb 8, 2019, at 12:03 AM, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > > Helping people to build non-free distributions of FFmpeg is a very weird > and dubious goal. > This is just helping other people violate the FFmpeg license. You could say the same thing for other build scripts such as the AUR for Arch Linux. It's just a tool. Tools can be misused. You could apply the same argument to our source code. Having --enable-nonfree in the source code helpspeople violate the license. But that's a completely different discussion. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, and I haven't actively searched for it, but I don't personally recall any evidence of any homebrew users violating the license. > Do not use Github to develop. Github is not-free. I believe there are three reasons for the Github suggestion. 1. It makes the homebrew command trivially shorter/simpler for the user: https://docs.brew.sh/How-to-Create-and-Maintain-a-Tap 2. More importantly, a question for those who volunteered (and potentially future contributors), would you be less inclined to maintain via a normal, non-Github git repo? Would the typical homebrew user know where to report issues? Where would they report issues? It's unfortunate that Github is not free, but we need to take account of the differences between communities and experience. 3. Someone is going to make this ffmpeg "formulae" (as they call it) which will become the most popular one among users. I bet it's most certainly going to be on Github. I think it's better that we have some ability to be able to edit it. ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
Hello, Thanks for your comments. On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 10:03 AM Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote: > Why do something special for homebrew, and not for all the other > distributions? > Why is homebrew different? Are you going to merge all .spec files from all > Linux distributions too? I don't think it's really productive to talk about other Linux distributions in this thread. That is really a different topic. > > That creates a bit of a messy situation, as users are expecting to be > > able to build ffmpeg with additional libraries, including nonfree ones > > such as fdk-aac. This is no longer easily doable. > > Helping people to build non-free distributions of FFmpeg is a very weird and > dubious goal. > This is just helping other people violate the FFmpeg license. That is a matter of personal viewpoint contrasted with general opinion about non-free FFmpeg, which I am 1) probably not the right person to discuss with, given my lack of presence on this mailing list and 2) the fact that the proposed formula simply mirrors what is already possible. I may be missing the full picture or developer consensus about how to handle this. I understand that there are folks who are very passionate about this topic, and that others are not. I can only observe that end users have the technical possibilities to build FFmpeg in a non-free and non-redistributable fashion. I don't see why it would be necessary to artificially restrict users in doing so. > Do not use Github to develop. Github is not-free. Use Github to mirror, if > you want, but not to develop. This formula could of course be mirrored from git.ffmpeg.org or wherever if there were a policy of not developing on GitHub. That said, I do see other repos on https://github.com/FFmpeg that are not mirrored, so I assume there is no such rule. Werner ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
Hello, On Wed, 6 Feb 2019, at 21:41, Werner Robitza wrote: > Homebrew has, with its 2.0 release, removed all options for its core > formulae [1], including ffmpeg. This means users can no longer add > non-default dependencies that aren't included in the core formula [2]. > I propose that FFmpeg maintains its own ffmpeg formula under its > GitHub organization at github.com/ffmpeg/homebrew-ffmpeg (or similar). Why do something special for homebrew, and not for all the other distributions? Why is homebrew different? Are you going to merge all .spec files from all Linux distributions too? > That creates a bit of a messy situation, as users are expecting to be > able to build ffmpeg with additional libraries, including nonfree ones > such as fdk-aac. This is no longer easily doable. Helping people to build non-free distributions of FFmpeg is a very weird and dubious goal. This is just helping other people violate the FFmpeg license. > Please let me know your thoughts. Do not use Github to develop. Github is not-free. Use Github to mirror, if you want, but not to develop. -- Jean-Baptiste Kempf - President +33 672 704 734 ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 11:11 PM Lou Logan wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2019, at 12:49 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > > > > This sounds like a strong reason not to add it to an FFmpeg > > repository: It was claimed in the past that I am the only one > > not supporting releases but the same was now repeated by > > other developers. > > We can simply provide a note that recommends using git master by instructing > the user to include the homebrew --HEAD option. That could easily be added to the formula's README and caveat section, yes. I don't see that as a major roadblock. If you have a specific text in mind that would emphasize that one or the other kind of installation is not supported/recommended, feel free to suggest that for inclusion. ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019, at 12:49 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > > This sounds like a strong reason not to add it to an FFmpeg > repository: It was claimed in the past that I am the only one > not supporting releases but the same was now repeated by > other developers. We can simply provide a note that recommends using git master by instructing the user to include the homebrew --HEAD option. ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
2019-02-07 21:32 GMT+01:00, Werner Robitza : > On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 8:50 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: >> Please send an initial version of the formula > > Sure! Attached to this email. > >> please understand >> that since we do not offer release support, release builds can't >> be the default. > > Homebrew always points to release versions This sounds like a strong reason not to add it to an FFmpeg repository: It was claimed in the past that I am the only one not supporting releases but the same was now repeated by other developers. Carl Eugen ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 9:29 PM Michael Niedermayer wrote: > I can setup a repo on github and or on git.ffmpeg.org (where ffmpeg-web is) > https://github.com/FFmpeg/web currently is a mirror of git.ffmpeg.org > assuming there is consensus that such a thing should be created GitHub would be preferred since that allows the user to simply run: brew tap-pin ffmpeg/ffmpeg brew install ffmpeg See also: https://docs.brew.sh/How-to-Create-and-Maintain-a-Tap > Its important that someone maintains this though, that is for example > someone needs to take care of reported bugs. Yes, that is absolutely clear. I think that bugs will reflect either general build errors that should be discussed here or posted on trac, or bugs in third party libraries (e.g., x265 breaking an ffmpeg build), or those which are related to Homebrew, which should be posted on their issue tracker. > It was not mentioned in this thread but i think it should be clear that > if this ends up not being maintained (well) then we should remove it again. That would be the best solution, rather than providing something that doesn't work (well). > Also we should aim toward having a good relation with everyone who > maintains a different solution. > The way i see it this is being created out of a technical need (the > removial of easy user configuration support) > Iam just saying this as ffmpeg-devel has sometimes been a bit toxic. > I think we should make double sure this does not degenerate into some > sort of hostile fork ... The idea would really be to to provide a clean formula the way it was before Homebrew removed all the options. This would also reflect what we're recommending people to do in the compilation guides (https://trac.ffmpeg.org/wiki/CompilationGuide/). The good thing about taps is that everyone can create a formula for their own needs, and it is my understanding that people may want to keep a formula that installs all dependencies by default, or have some special build flags. So I don't see a potential issue with "hostile forks". > and i probably should also say that i do not know exactly who maintains > which alternative where ... Until now, not many, since there was no real need for it. Now this need has suddenly come up, hence my initiative to provide a single good source rather than having users do a web search for whatever formula might work. Thanks for your thoughts – good points. Werner ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 8:50 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Please send an initial version of the formula
Sure! Attached to this email.
> please understand
> that since we do not offer release support, release builds can't
> be the default.
Homebrew always points to release versions, the latest one being 4.1
for the official ffmpeg formula. There is an option --HEAD that
fetches the latest Git version though. See
https://docs.brew.sh/Manpage#install-options-formula
--
class Ffmpeg < Formula
desc "Play, record, convert, and stream audio and video"
homepage "https://ffmpeg.org/";
url "https://ffmpeg.org/releases/ffmpeg-4.1.tar.xz";
sha256 "a38ec4d026efb58506a99ad5cd23d5a9793b4bf415f2c4c2e9c1bb444acd1994"
version "4.1-custom"
head "https://github.com/FFmpeg/FFmpeg.git";
option "with-aom", "Enable AV1 video codec"
option "with-chromaprint", "Enable the Chromaprint audio
fingerprinting library"
option "with-fdk-aac", "Enable the Fraunhofer FDK AAC library"
option "with-libass", "Enable ASS/SSA subtitle format"
option "with-librsvg", "Enable SVG files as inputs via librsvg"
option "with-libsoxr", "Enable the soxr resample library"
option "with-libssh", "Enable SFTP protocol via libssh"
option "with-libvidstab", "Enable vid.stab support for video stabilization"
option "with-libvmaf", "Enable libvmaf scoring library"
option "with-opencore-amr", "Enable Opencore AMR NR/WB audio format"
option "with-openh264", "Enable OpenH264 library"
option "with-openjpeg", "Enable JPEG 2000 image format"
option "with-openssl", "Enable SSL support"
option "with-rtmpdump", "Enable RTMP protocol"
option "with-rubberband", "Enable rubberband library"
option "with-srt", "Enable SRT library"
option "with-tesseract", "Enable the tesseract OCR engine"
option "with-webp", "Enable using libwebp to encode WEBP images"
option "with-zeromq", "Enable using libzeromq to receive commands
sent through a libzeromq client"
option "with-zimg", "Enable z.lib zimg library"
depends_on "nasm" => :build
depends_on "pkg-config" => :build
depends_on "texi2html" => :build
depends_on "lame"
depends_on "libvorbis"
depends_on "libvpx"
depends_on "opus"
depends_on "sdl2"
depends_on "snappy"
depends_on "theora"
depends_on "x264"
depends_on "x265"
depends_on "xvid"
depends_on "xz"
depends_on "aom" => :optional
depends_on "chromaprint" => :optional
depends_on "fdk-aac" => :optional
depends_on "fontconfig" => :optional
depends_on "freetype" => :optional
depends_on "frei0r" => :optional
depends_on "game-music-emu" => :optional
depends_on "libass" => :optional
depends_on "libbluray" => :optional
depends_on "libbs2b" => :optional
depends_on "libcaca" => :optional
depends_on "libgsm" => :optional
depends_on "libmodplug" => :optional
depends_on "librsvg" => :optional
depends_on "libsoxr" => :optional
depends_on "libssh" => :optional
depends_on "libvidstab" => :optional
depends_on "libvmaf" => :optional
depends_on "opencore-amr" => :optional
depends_on "openh264" => :optional
depends_on "openjpeg" => :optional
depends_on "openssl" => :optional
depends_on "rtmpdump" => :optional
depends_on "rubberband" => :optional
depends_on "speex" => :optional
depends_on "srt" => :optional
depends_on "tesseract" => :optional
depends_on "two-lame" => :optional
depends_on "wavpack" => :optional
depends_on "webp" => :optional
depends_on "zeromq" => :optional
depends_on "zimg" => :optional
def install
args = %W[
--prefix=#{prefix}
--enable-shared
--enable-pthreads
--enable-version3
--enable-hardcoded-tables
--enable-avresample
--cc=#{ENV.cc}
--host-cflags=#{ENV.cflags}
--host-ldflags=#{ENV.ldflags}
--enable-ffplay
--enable-gpl
--enable-libmp3lame
--enable-libopus
--enable-libsnappy
--enable-libtheora
--enable-libvorbis
--enable-libvpx
--enable-libx264
--enable-libx265
--enable-libxvid
--enable-lzma
--disable-libjack
--disable-indev=jack
]
args << "--enable-chromaprint" if build.with? "chromaprint"
args << "--enable-frei0r" if build.with? "frei0r"
args << "--enable-libaom" if build.with? "aom"
args << "--enable-libass" if build.with? "libass"
args << "--enable-libbluray" if build.with? "libbluray"
args << "--enable-libbs2b" if build.with? "libbs2b"
args << "--enable-libcaca" if build.with? "libcaca"
args << "--enable-libfdk-aac" if build.with? "fdk-aac"
args << "--enable-libfontconfig" if build.with? "fontconfig"
args << "--enable-libfreetype" if build.with? "freetype"
args << "--enable-libgme" if build.with? "game-music-emu"
args << "--enable-libgsm" if build.with? "libgsm"
args << "--enable-libmodplug" if build.with? "libmodplug"
args << "--enable-libopencore-amrnb" <<
"--enable-libopencore-amrwb" if build.with? "opencore-amr"
args <<
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 05:28:10PM +, Derek Buitenhuis wrote: > On 07/02/2019 16:43, Werner Robitza wrote: > > Several people have already volunteered in this thread (Reto, Kyle and > > me), as well as the author of this formula (with whom I've had offline > > discussions), which we can use as a starting point: > > https://github.com/varenc/homebrew-ffmpeg-with-options/blob/master/Formula/ffmpeg.rb > > (mentioned in my original post). > > I haven't seen anyone object to hosting it as a separate repo on our infra, > but I also didn't see anyone who maintains our infra reply... maybe Michael > has opinions. I can setup a repo on github and or on git.ffmpeg.org (where ffmpeg-web is) https://github.com/FFmpeg/web currently is a mirror of git.ffmpeg.org assuming there is consensus that such a thing should be created Its important that someone maintains this though, that is for example someone needs to take care of reported bugs. It was not mentioned in this thread but i think it should be clear that if this ends up not being maintained (well) then we should remove it again. Also we should aim toward having a good relation with everyone who maintains a different solution. The way i see it this is being created out of a technical need (the removial of easy user configuration support) Iam just saying this as ffmpeg-devel has sometimes been a bit toxic. I think we should make double sure this does not degenerate into some sort of hostile fork ... and i probably should also say that i do not know exactly who maintains which alternative where ... Thanks [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety -- Benjamin Franklin signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
2019-02-06 21:41 GMT+01:00, Werner Robitza : > Please let me know your thoughts. Since this may happen: Please send an initial version of the formula, please understand that since we do not offer release support, release builds can't be the default. Carl Eugen ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019, at 8:28 AM, Derek Buitenhuis wrote: > > I haven't seen anyone object to hosting it as a separate repo on our infra, > but I also didn't see anyone who maintains our infra reply... maybe Michael > has opinions. I'm not against it. Seems like it will be helpful to users and I'm certain Werner and the other volunteers will keep it actively maintained. I can setup the repo under our Github organization and give the volunteers access to just that repo. I'll wait a few days and do that if there are no objections. ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: >The question is what happens if one of the dependencies >in FFmpeg's formula does not work or disappears. Then the formula will be updated accordingly, as this has been done during all the last years. Best regards, Reto ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
2019-02-07 19:24 GMT+01:00, Reto Kromer : > Gerion Entrup wrote: > >>do the dependencies of the options need to be maintained >>in the repo as well? > > I guess, this is out of the scope of FFmpeg. The question is what happens if one of the dependencies in FFmpeg's formula does not work or disappears. Carl Eugen ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
Gerion Entrup wrote: >do the dependencies of the options need to be maintained in the >repo as well? I guess, this is out of the scope of FFmpeg. Best regards, Reto ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
Am Mittwoch, 6. Februar 2019, 21:41:29 CET schrieb Werner Robitza:
> Dear all,
>
> Homebrew has, with its 2.0 release, removed all options for its core
> formulae [1], including ffmpeg. This means users can no longer add
> non-default dependencies that aren't included in the core formula [2].
> That creates a bit of a messy situation, as users are expecting to be
> able to build ffmpeg with additional libraries, including nonfree ones
> such as fdk-aac. This is no longer easily doable.
>
> The Homebrew maintainers suggest to provide an alternative third-party
> tap with an ffmpeg formula, such as this one created by another user
> [3].
>
> I propose that FFmpeg maintains its own ffmpeg formula under its
> GitHub organization at github.com/ffmpeg/homebrew-ffmpeg (or similar).
> This will ensure that there's one formula users will discover when
> they look for an alternative tap, thus improving discoverability and
> avoiding fragmentation. We could use the above link as a starting
> point.
>
> Homebrew's lead maintainer also noted that this repo ("tap") could be
> indexed [4] – he was reluctant to point to it in the official
> formula's caveat section though, as they will not endorse third-party
> taps.
>
> I am happy to maintain this formula – and maybe there are other
> community members who want to support this effort. The maintenance
> effort would basically be: bumping the formula everytime there's an
> official release, and testing its build.
>
> Please let me know your thoughts.
>
> Best regards,
> Werner
>
> [1] https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/issues/31510
> [2] https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/blob/master/Formula/ffmpeg.rb
> [3]
> https://github.com/varenc/homebrew-ffmpeg-with-options/blob/master/Formula/ffmpeg.rb
> [4] https://docs.brew.sh/Interesting-Taps-and-Forks
Hi,
do the dependencies of the options need to be maintained in the repo as well?
(BTW, the whole option concept seems to be quite similar to use flags in Gentoo
[1].)
Regards,
Gerion
[1]
https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/tree/media-video/ffmpeg/ffmpeg-4.1.ebuild
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On 07/02/2019 16:43, Werner Robitza wrote: > Several people have already volunteered in this thread (Reto, Kyle and > me), as well as the author of this formula (with whom I've had offline > discussions), which we can use as a starting point: > https://github.com/varenc/homebrew-ffmpeg-with-options/blob/master/Formula/ffmpeg.rb > (mentioned in my original post). I haven't seen anyone object to hosting it as a separate repo on our infra, but I also didn't see anyone who maintains our infra reply... maybe Michael has opinions. I think it's a good idea to have a known 'good' homebrew recipe... I've seen a lot of projects get ... interesting... bugs filed against them that only occurred because of weird ports/homebrew/etc builds. - Derek ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 5:21 PM Derek Buitenhuis wrote: > I guess my question is: Who amongst the devs here wants to write it? Several people have already volunteered in this thread (Reto, Kyle and me), as well as the author of this formula (with whom I've had offline discussions), which we can use as a starting point: https://github.com/varenc/homebrew-ffmpeg-with-options/blob/master/Formula/ffmpeg.rb (mentioned in my original post). Werner ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On 07/02/2019 08:06, Werner Robitza wrote: >> I don't think that's the suggestion. Separate Github repo belonging to >> the FFmpeg Github organization. > > Correct. No modification in the source tree. I guess my question is: Who amongst the devs here wants to write it? (Not me.) - Derek ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 9:18 AM Reto Kromer wrote: > I guess the discussion is "only" on: should this happen inside > or outside the official FFmpeg. My personal preference would be > inside. Yes, that was the main point – I see others have this preference as well. And several people have already volunteered to help maintain this formula. Thank you for the feedback so far! ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
>>On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 9:51 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos >>wrote: >>>We already provide a build script and we believe that it works very >>>well, in addition a kind supporter offers osx binaries. >> >>That's all true, but not all users want to build manually (or have the >>technical skills to understand what's going on) and take care of a >>dozen dependencies. The build scripts and guides are quite >>straightforward but it still takes more time than just running "brew >>install ffmpeg". Just for context, in the last 90 days, there have been >>over a quarter million installs of ffmpeg through Homebrew. >>That's a considerable amount. > >In addition, I would like to add that the version 2 of Homebrew works not only >on macOS, but also on Linux and even on Windows running Linux. The >proposal >made would offer again an easy way to install a parametrable FFmpeg to the end >user. > >I guess the discussion is "only" on: should this happen inside or outside the >official FFmpeg. My personal preference would be inside. > >Hoping this is useful! Reto Just wondering, can it cross-compile ffmpeg under linux/ming64 for target win10x64 ? ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
Werner Robitza wrote: >On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 9:51 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos > wrote: >>We already provide a build script and we believe that it works >>very well, in addition a kind supporter offers osx binaries. > >That's all true, but not all users want to build manually (or >have the technical skills to understand what's going on) and >take care of a dozen dependencies. The build scripts and guides >are quite straightforward but it still takes more time than just >running "brew install ffmpeg". Just for context, in the last 90 >days, there have been over a quarter million installs of ffmpeg >through Homebrew. >That's a considerable amount. In addition, I would like to add that the version 2 of Homebrew works not only on macOS, but also on Linux and even on Windows running Linux. The proposal made would offer again an easy way to install a parametrable FFmpeg to the end user. I guess the discussion is "only" on: should this happen inside or outside the official FFmpeg. My personal preference would be inside. Hoping this is useful! Reto ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 10:51 PM Kyle Swanson wrote: > On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 1:43 PM Helmut K. C. Tessarek > wrote: > > Anyhow, I don't think that adding a formula to the ffmpeg src tree is > > the right approach. > > I don't think that's the suggestion. Separate Github repo belonging to > the FFmpeg Github organization. Correct. No modification in the source tree. ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 9:51 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: > Why don't you put your "formula" into your own github repository? I could do that, but as I've mentioned, providing an official formula (within a separate repository, not in the source tree!) would make it easier for end users to discover, and it would ensure that there's some authority over the build process. If we sent off users to third-party taps from unknown sources, that could lead to bad end user experience with Homebrew and FFmpeg, neither of which is wanted – think about outdated taps or potentially even malicious intent. > We already provide a build script and we believe that it works > very well, in addition a kind supporter offers osx binaries. That's all true, but not all users want to build manually (or have the technical skills to understand what's going on) and take care of a dozen dependencies. The build scripts and guides are quite straightforward but it still takes more time than just running "brew install ffmpeg". Just for context, in the last 90 days, there have been over a quarter million installs of ffmpeg through Homebrew. That's a considerable amount. Also, the binaries do not contain all third-party dependencies one might want, such as non-free software or larger libraries. I've mentioned this in my post as well. ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
Hi, On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 1:43 PM Helmut K. C. Tessarek wrote: > Anyhow, I don't think that adding a formula to the ffmpeg src tree is > the right approach. I don't think that's the suggestion. Separate Github repo belonging to the FFmpeg Github organization. Thanks, Kyle ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
Hi, On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 1:20 PM Reto Kromer wrote: > > Werner Robitza wrote: > > >I propose that FFmpeg maintains its own ffmpeg formula under > >its GitHub organization > > I second the idea. +1 > > (Homebrew works now on any modern x86_64 architecture running > Linux, macOS and Windows with Linux.) > > >I am happy to maintain this formula – and maybe there are other > >community members who want to support this effort. The > >maintenance effort would basically be: bumping the formula > >everytime there's an official release, and testing its build. > > I would be happy to help. Me too. > > Best regards, Reto Thanks, Kyle ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 2019-02-06 21:41, Werner Robitza wrote: > Please let me know your thoughts. I'd like to know why people always think that brew is the best way to get ports. Have you looked into MacPorts? No issues with ffmpeg there. If something should be missing, ping the maintainer, and/or create a PR. Done. Anyhow, I don't think that adding a formula to the ffmpeg src tree is the right approach. Cheers, K. C. - -- regards Helmut K. C. Tessarek KeyID 0x172380A011EF4944 Key fingerprint = 8A55 70C1 BD85 D34E ADBC 386C 1723 80A0 11EF 4944 /* Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer for chaos and madness await thee at its end. */ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEE191csiqpm8f5Ln9WvgmFNJ1E3QAFAlxbVN8ACgkQvgmFNJ1E 3QCBBQ//WERtTLEDSAgTOdTWC5Xcx77hmbD4BaFiabhbQklxN+CIHnLpuk5NP1vo GWEod9s7kxv8+iZyAySpsHf70iVeH8vJNGT13KZvIwk3C3QSS9z9w6RgVRr84oog Ox9l7EqUu1FWlG1HNiWmjTm2p+zzLSzp7lEk69L7g8itJ+8AXDd0xtLryXhRDMWB zFzqtrrYNVOOrt8TasJXMSTvpzwiYfZqB4lTxjyJWdfe08ip06SLOxJx4Lx3275J KeLnWHdeaUAyp7tOYjB71xBcZgVqZf1GDYMX9Hm4Ll04QNbOYWf0C/MHeEa2g2jV y8ZOams44UQRhoiJLp7dfw7XotSt3AsU4AHQ+FozpuoUxk0QW3WPbwir542cN/11 IxV/AqzI3BkekZ+vp7SZYUG3feTBQW2jlAq9GxrC2LxTNw7cnao67VSZIbm+ihWN pU2J7aZyyKEmRuIviP8Wb3Zf9JtRyUF67jrtMrX3lSGZYoSve7B5tvpnrCfyjzzK yFI462X+xTYYB2yiruHCY5UOVkGTO85Wq3+GGmj9UZcoymRnE5DC19P7vUUcenCk AONCJiaeVSbpiFHw8QGmJSewUUJ9Cwj0CeKVUlvs0vyScVdKTOG2645fw/W+mwyR FhYFGckxyv7a1N2lUqaQz6vSTm87VBUsHc5qDMsyE99iMGF6+nE= =rdZu -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
Werner Robitza wrote: >I propose that FFmpeg maintains its own ffmpeg formula under >its GitHub organization I second the idea. (Homebrew works now on any modern x86_64 architecture running Linux, macOS and Windows with Linux.) >I am happy to maintain this formula – and maybe there are other >community members who want to support this effort. The >maintenance effort would basically be: bumping the formula >everytime there's an official release, and testing its build. I would be happy to help. Best regards, Reto ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
2019-02-06 21:41 GMT+01:00, Werner Robitza : > I am happy to maintain this formula Why don't you put your "formula" into your own github repository? We already provide a build script and we believe that it works very well, in addition a kind supporter offers osx binaries. Carl Eugen ___ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
[FFmpeg-devel] Proposal: Homebrew tap for FFmpeg
Dear all,
Homebrew has, with its 2.0 release, removed all options for its core
formulae [1], including ffmpeg. This means users can no longer add
non-default dependencies that aren't included in the core formula [2].
That creates a bit of a messy situation, as users are expecting to be
able to build ffmpeg with additional libraries, including nonfree ones
such as fdk-aac. This is no longer easily doable.
The Homebrew maintainers suggest to provide an alternative third-party
tap with an ffmpeg formula, such as this one created by another user
[3].
I propose that FFmpeg maintains its own ffmpeg formula under its
GitHub organization at github.com/ffmpeg/homebrew-ffmpeg (or similar).
This will ensure that there's one formula users will discover when
they look for an alternative tap, thus improving discoverability and
avoiding fragmentation. We could use the above link as a starting
point.
Homebrew's lead maintainer also noted that this repo ("tap") could be
indexed [4] – he was reluctant to point to it in the official
formula's caveat section though, as they will not endorse third-party
taps.
I am happy to maintain this formula – and maybe there are other
community members who want to support this effort. The maintenance
effort would basically be: bumping the formula everytime there's an
official release, and testing its build.
Please let me know your thoughts.
Best regards,
Werner
[1] https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/issues/31510
[2] https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core/blob/master/Formula/ffmpeg.rb
[3]
https://github.com/varenc/homebrew-ffmpeg-with-options/blob/master/Formula/ffmpeg.rb
[4] https://docs.brew.sh/Interesting-Taps-and-Forks
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
