[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Merge libavcore into libavutil
Ronald S. Bultje
Sun Feb 13 21:11:28 CET 2011
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 11:36 AM, Stefano Sabatini
<stefano.sabatini-lala at poste.it> wrote:
> On date Sunday 2011-02-13 16:18:12 +0000, M?ns Rullg?rd encoded:
>> Stefano Sabatini <stefano.sabatini-lala at poste.it> writes:
>> > On date Sunday 2011-02-13 16:06:10 +0100, Luca Barbato encoded:
>> >> On 02/13/2011 03:53 PM, Kostya wrote:
>> >> > On Wed, Feb 09, 2011 at 07:36:15AM +0100, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
>> >> >> It is pretty hopeless that other considerable projects will adopt
>> >> >> libavutil alone in other projects. Projects that need small footprint
>> >> >> are better off with more specialized libraries such as gnulib or rather
>> >> >> just copy the necessary parts that they need. With this in mind, nobody
>> >> >> is helped by having libavutil and libavcore split. In order to ease
>> >> >> maintenance inside and around FFmpeg and to reduce confusion where to
>> >> >> put common code, avcore's functionality is merged (back) to avutil.
>> >> >
>> >> > I think that's right thing to do and patch looks ok to me.
>> >> Just to be clear, the patch looks fine and we should try to first agree
>> >> on what's in what before splitting libraries in the future.
>> > This situation is quite paradoxical, as when the library was created
>> > no-one objected to it, or I wouldn't have committed the change in the
>> > first place.
>> Both my memory and the archives tell a different story, one where
>> _everybody_, including you, was against this split. ?After some
>> discussion, you reversed course and committed the split with only a
>> single approval (from Michael).
>>  http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video.ffmpeg.devel/112847
>>  http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video.ffmpeg.devel/113329
> Yes but then nobody raised more objections
I didn't object further because I don't want to endlessly bikeshed
over that kind of stuff. That doesn't mean I agree.
More information about the ffmpeg-devel