[gst-devel] Required GLib version policy

[Sebastian Dröge]

Am Donnerstag, den 19.02.2009, 10:17 -0800 schrieb Michael Smith:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 8:36 AM, Tim-Philipp Müller <t.i.m at zen.co.uk> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think we should try to bump our GLib requirements more often. Slowly
> > and conservatively, but regularly.
> 
> I've argued against this previously, but I think I've been
> sufficiently convinced that the burden to users/developers is not
> unreasonable, and the benefits sufficient, that this is a good idea.
> 
> 
> >
> > To this effect I propose some sort of informal GLib version policy,
> > something like:
> >
> >  - whenever we release core/base, we look into
> >   bumping the GLib requirement for core/base
> >   (ie. right *after* the core/base release, not
> >   for the release itself)
> >
> >  - we then look at all (stable) GLib 2.N.1 releases
> >   that are older than ~12 months, and pick the
> >   highest N. That's our new GLIB_REQ then.
> >
> > The overall effect would be that when we release the next core/base the
> > required GLib version would be at least around 15-18 months old, which
> > seems fair to me (and what I think emerged as acceptable consensus the
> > last time we debated this issue on the mailing list).
> >
> > So:
> >
> >  - GLib 2.N.1 would be at least 12 months old
> >   *when we bump the requirement* (at this point
> >   only affecting GStreamer hackers)
> >
> >  - a core/base with this new requirement would
> >   be done ca. 3 months later, so at the time
> >   this new requirement hits GStreamer consumers
> >   and distributors the GLib version required
> >   would be at least 15 months old
> >
> >  - any GLib 2.N.x series will typically be
> >   maintained and in use for 6-9 months (random
> >   info on the side)
> 
> I _would_ prefer to see the requirement change a little less
> frequently that this, though. Once a year, for example, rather than
> twice a year. To give a concrete suggestion then: I'd change your
> proposal to do this after every second core/base release.
> 
> I'm not going to actively campaign against your plan if you think this
> is a bad idea, though.

A new GLib version every second core/base release sounds good to me and
this shouldn't be a too big problem for anybody IMHO. Most people will
have a newer GLib by that time anyway and all other should be able to
update GLib together with GStreamer...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/gstreamer-devel/attachments/20090220/fdc3633d/attachment.pgp>