[vlc-devel] [vlc-commits] bluray: Add support for overlay
remi at remlab.net
Thu Mar 8 19:16:01 CET 2012
Le Thursday 8 March 2012 19:27:32 Jean-Baptiste Kempf, vous avez écrit :
> On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 07:24:02PM +0200, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote :
> > Le Thursday 8 March 2012 19:18:04 Rafaël Carré, vous avez écrit :
> > > Also backporting feature into 2.0 is needed to develop the android
> > > port, as 2.0 is the 'officially advertized' version for working on
> > > android.
> > That is a problem that the Android porters created for themselves while
> > proving yet again overly optimistic. That is not an upstream problem.
> No, the problem is that there are too many revert and force on vlc.git.
That is such a lame lie to shift the blame to other people. I cannot find any
Android-relevant revert since at earliset (maybe) 6 weeks ago.
> > We don't backport features into 2.0 anymore. Full point.
That is how the process has been agreed long ago. If you want to change the
process, you are free to discuss.
But in any case, I still find that backporting practically all new features
into 2.0 is antithetical nonsense.
> > Otherwise it is a vicious circle: there is only one new feature, so VLC
> > 2.1 will not be released any time soon, so the features gets backported
> > and so on and so on. If you want new features out fast, then make VLC
> > 2.1 happen fast.
> I suggested a short circle for next major, you said it was a bad idea.
I said 2.1 had nothing to offer, which it indeed had not then. And that is
preceisely *because* everything is backported. If only fixes had been
backported, now there would be some actual new stuff.
We return to the pre-0.9.0 short cycle. But then we have to accept that
regressions will happen due to lack of testing and fixing. That is equally
true whether the release is 2.0.1 coming from 2.0-bugfix or 2.1.0 coming
master. I am fine with that and I think my short historical records as release
manager prove it.
More information about the vlc-devel