3 ms·

It's something in between. "The ffmpeg program is only provided for script compatibility and will be removed in a future release. It has been deprecated in the

It's something in between. "The ffmpeg program is only provided for script compatibility and will be removed in a future release. It has been deprecated in the Libav project to allow for incompatible command line syntax improvements in its replacement called avconv (see Changelog for details). Please use avconv instead."

kierank 11y ago
I won't take a position on this but the message you quote is a revised version that was put in place many years later after numerous user complaints about confusion.
- roghummal 11y ago
  And in my opinion it's still very confusing. If there was a more confusing version of this message and it was refined to this then I'm inclined to believe the deception was intentional. libav is not the successor to ffmpeg. libav is a fork. How'd Debian move so quickly to a(n) (immature) fork? Politics.
  - phire 11y ago
    No, it moved because the forkers were also the Debian package maintainers. Basically it was a big split down the middle, the entire project split in half.
    - sjwright 11y ago
      Which makes Debian's return to FFmpeg all the more noteworthy.
    - roghummal 11y ago
      So it was political, like I said. Not to kick 'em while they're down but it certainly wasn't on technical merit.
  - kierank 11y ago
    That's not really true since the majority of pre-fork ffmpeg developers agreed to fork to libav. As I say to people this is like the Catholic/Protestant split, both sides think they are the one-true-ffmpeg but both have valid claims. Doesn't change the fact it's a disastrous situation and both projects are not in particularly good states.
    - roghummal 11y ago
      >both sides think they are the one-true-ffmpeg but both have valid claims. ffmpeg is the one-true-ffmpeg. If libav surpassed ffmpeg, we'd have libav. The one-true-libav. libav doesn't have a valid claim; It's a fork second to ffmpeg. Somebody put the cart before the horse. Happy to see it fixed.

kierank 11y ago

I won't take a position on this but the message you quote is a revised version that was put in place many years later after numerous user complaints about confusion.

roghummal 11y ago
And in my opinion it's still very confusing. If there was a more confusing version of this message and it was refined to this then I'm inclined to believe the deception was intentional. libav is not the successor to ffmpeg. libav is a fork. How'd Debian move so quickly to a(n) (immature) fork? Politics.
- phire 11y ago
  No, it moved because the forkers were also the Debian package maintainers. Basically it was a big split down the middle, the entire project split in half.
  - sjwright 11y ago
    Which makes Debian's return to FFmpeg all the more noteworthy.
  - roghummal 11y ago
    So it was political, like I said. Not to kick 'em while they're down but it certainly wasn't on technical merit.
- kierank 11y ago
  That's not really true since the majority of pre-fork ffmpeg developers agreed to fork to libav. As I say to people this is like the Catholic/Protestant split, both sides think they are the one-true-ffmpeg but both have valid claims. Doesn't change the fact it's a disastrous situation and both projects are not in particularly good states.
  - roghummal 11y ago
    >both sides think they are the one-true-ffmpeg but both have valid claims. ffmpeg is the one-true-ffmpeg. If libav surpassed ffmpeg, we'd have libav. The one-true-libav. libav doesn't have a valid claim; It's a fork second to ffmpeg. Somebody put the cart before the horse. Happy to see it fixed.