Select provider of libav* libraries

[Bálint Réczey]

2015-05-18 16:45 GMT+02:00 Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk>:
> Quoting Alessandro Ghedini (2015-05-18 14:33:18)
>> On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 11:15:04AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>>> There are multiple ways to handle packages unsuitable for long-term
>>> maintenance:
>>>
>>>   * Treat as "experimental" - e.g. mpv
>>
>> How is mpv unsuitable for long-term maintainance?
>
> Oh, I simply assumed that was the case, but since we have an expert on
> the matter (yourself) let's ask:
>
> Why are some mpv packages targeted experimental rather than unstable, if
> not because those specific releases are treated (by you) as unsuitable
> for long-term maintenance?
I uploaded xbmc versions built with ffmpeg to experimental because
ffmpeg was not allowed to enter testing but I wanted to provide an
xbmc version to our users which has better security support and fewer
bugs.
I could not upload it to unstable since unstable could not have two
versions of the package built from the same source and creating a new
xbmc-ffmpeg source package would have consume a lot of additional
mirror space which I wanted to avoid.
This solution seems to be trivial and established for trying different
build dependencies among developers and I don't really understand why
you are asking for explanation.

Cheers,
Balint