[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Why does this break FATE?

[Soft Works]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces at ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of
> James Almer
> Sent: Thursday, 9 September 2021 03:57
> To: ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Why does this break FATE?
> 

[..]

> >
> > Based on the fact that requirements are strict about MINOR bumps
> and
> > mandating them to be included in the very commit that is requiring
> > the bump, I didn't expect that there's a different strategy for
> > MAJOR bumps.
> 
> A major bump is done once every few years to remove deprecated APIs
> and
> open the ABI for changes. After a major bump takes place, there's an
> "Unstable ABI" period where one can make such breaking changes
> (Altering
> field offsets in public structs, adding new fields or changing their
> types on structs that have their size tied to the ABI, changing
> public
> enum and #define values, etc).
> 
> A single major bump should encompass every breaking change during
> this
> short "unstable" period. 

Why does there have to be an "unstable" period instead of making the
MAJOR bumps directly in those commits that are breaking ABI compatibility,
Is it about "saving" numbers?

softworkz