From owner-freebsd-multimedia@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 16 22:53:47 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F09E1065674 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2008 22:53:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nox@saturn.kn-bremen.de) Received: from gwyn.kn-bremen.de (gwyn.kn-bremen.de [212.63.36.242]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48FC38FC29 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2008 22:53:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nox@saturn.kn-bremen.de) Received: by gwyn.kn-bremen.de (Postfix, from userid 10) id 43EA0192110; Tue, 16 Dec 2008 23:22:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from saturn.kn-bremen.de (noident@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by saturn.kn-bremen.de (8.14.2/8.13.8) with ESMTP id mBGMKuR5028288; Tue, 16 Dec 2008 23:20:56 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from nox@saturn.kn-bremen.de) Received: (from nox@localhost) by saturn.kn-bremen.de (8.14.2/8.13.6/Submit) id mBGMKtZS028287; Tue, 16 Dec 2008 23:20:55 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from nox) Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 23:20:55 +0100 (CET) From: Juergen Lock Message-Id: <200812162220.mBGMKtZS028287@saturn.kn-bremen.de> To: thomas.e.zander@googlemail.com X-Newsgroups: local.list.freebsd.multimedia In-Reply-To: <786602c60811180032h673b099fod01248f06204cc6c@mail.gmail.com> References: <193678.16469.qm@web39108.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Organization: home Cc: freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org, bf2006a@yahoo.com Subject: Re: A new multimedia/mplayer? X-BeenThere: freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Multimedia discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 22:53:47 -0000 In article <786602c60811180032h673b099fod01248f06204cc6c@mail.gmail.com> you write: >On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 08:44, bf wrote: > >> In a recent discussion on the mplayer >> mailing lists, developers said that they were unlikely to release a new >> tarball anytime soon ( but if you know differently, please let us know), and >> that they recommended that everyone who was able to should use a more recent >> svn snapshot. Can we therefore switch multimedia/mplayer to a recent svn >> snapshot, to take advantage of the many bugfixes and improvements in svn? > >I am quite reluctant to have snapshot-only-versions in the ports tree, >but of course I do see your point. It would be really desirable to >have some kind of release engineering at the mplayer development >front. But if there is no intent on their side to ever do that, we >might need to switch to a semi-predictable/regular cycle of update our >ports tree to snapshots to make features (and more importantly >security fixes) accessible to the users. >However, I would appreciate some comments from the list subscribers >regarding this issue. > >Should we >1) use svn snapshots of mplayer and update them every n weeks/months ? Going after what I read on the mplayer list, it seems we want to do this. >2) stick with 1.0rc2 + security patches until rc3 is released, >whenever that may be? >3) ... Or maybe you could keep the current mplayer port, repocopy it to mplayer-devel and then update that to snapshot(s)? (similar to what I did with qemu, except for that fact that qemu upstream never wanted to stop doing releases, its just the tcg conversion that took a while...) My $.02, :) Juergen