Hi Manuel, Thanks for your quick reply.
On 08.01.2016 14:31, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote: > I think that Alberto was planning since many months ago to upload > 3.4.0, and he mentioned it the last time that we met (about 3 weeks > ago), but different issues (like the big GCC-5/C++11 transition, and > smaller transitions after that) prevented him from doing that at the > times when he had the time to prepare the whole move/transition. (OSG > releases usually require SONAME/VERSION bumps if not source changes, > even sometimes between -RC and final releases). OK. > openscenegraph is not a leaf package, but much further behind in > priority than giflib, gdal, xine or ffmepg (and openscenegraph depends > on a vast number of basic libraries), so in the end the transitions of > all of these take precedence. 3.4.0 will probably require a > transition for which maybe all rdeps are not ready, so would be a > problem for the more important transitions that might get entangled > with. I see, it's better not to entangle transitions. > I don't know if the fact of not including the patch of ffmpeg 2.9/3.0 > was an oversight or on purpose because the plan to upload 3.4, or if > upstream patches take care of this. If you plan to start the > transition of ffmpeg imminently, maybe at this point it's better to > include the patch than to start a transition also with OSG-3.4.0. Well, this is imminent in Debian timescales, that is this month, but not this week. ;) > ... all of this is subject to Alberto's opinion, who is better > informed about all of this and follows upstream development closer. I > just wanted to chime in because he might be busy and not reply for a > few days, and specially to explain that moving to 3.4 might not be > straightforward. Thanks, this is much appreciated. Best regards, Andreas
