Dropping support for GStreamer 0.10 in Pidgin 2.14

[David Woodhouse]

Changing subject to highlight the proposal.

cf. https://bitbucket.org/pidgin/main/pull-requests/322/media-fixes/diff

On Sat, 2018-03-24 at 12:37 +0000, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> On Sat, 2018-03-24 at 10:53 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > On Thu, 2018-03-08 at 23:39 -0600, Gary Kramlich wrote:
> > > 
> > > Greetings Programs,
> > > 
> > > Pidgin 2.13.0 has been released.  You can find source tarballs on
> > > Sourceforge[1] or Bitbucket [2].  Windows versions are still in the
> > > works, so hang tight and we'll announce when they're ready as well.
> > 
> > When building with GStreamer 0.10:
> > 
> > mediamanager.c: In function ‘purple_media_manager_remove_output_window’:
> > mediamanager.c:1705:47: warning: passing argument 1 of ‘gst_plugin_feature_get_name’ from incompatible pointer type [-Wincompatible-pointer-types]
> >     factory_name = gst_plugin_feature_get_name(factory);
> >                                                ^
> > In file included from /usr/include/gstreamer-0.10/gst/gstelementfactory.h:34:0,
> >                  from /usr/include/gstreamer-0.10/gst/gstelement.h:60,
> >                  from /usr/include/gstreamer-0.10/gst/gstbin.h:27,
> >                  from /usr/include/gstreamer-0.10/gst/gst.h:35,
> >                  from media-gst.h:33,
> >                  from mediamanager.c:36:
> > /usr/include/gstreamer-0.10/gst/gstpluginfeature.h:143:14: note: expected ‘GstPluginFeature * {aka struct _GstPluginFeature *}’ but argument is of type ‘GstElementFactory * {aka struct _GstElementFactory *}’
> >  const gchar    *gst_plugin_feature_get_name             (GstPluginFeature *feature);
> >               ^
> > 
> > This was introduced in PR#52 with a backport of a GStreamer-1.0-only
> > patch from 3.0.
> > 
> > Do we actually care about GStreamer 0.10 any more? Should we stop
> > supporting it for future builds even in the 2.x branch? It's not
> > actually supposed to be a user-visible ABI, is it? It's all wrapped in
> > Purple APIs, so we're perfectly compatible even if libpurple changes
> > which implementation it uses behind the scenes?
>
> 0.10 support can be removed as far as I am concerned.
> 
>  Jocke
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 5213 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://pidgin.im/pipermail/devel/attachments/20180411/20129f3e/attachment.bin>