https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 Nicolas Dufresne <nicolas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |nicolas@xxxxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #19 from Nicolas Dufresne <nicolas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> --- Hi Folks, as libcamera is not yet to a point were it can be released with a version, I would recommend going further then just the Fedora packaging rules. I would suggest to patch libcamera to rename the library, I would propose libcamera-unstable.so.X.Y. This way, you can pretty much be guarantee to never clash with a stable version of the SO. As for the users of libcamera, the GStreamer element rely on stable GStreamer release, but unstable libcamera, and that's why we placed inside libcamera. For the SPA plugin, inside of PipeWire, it depends on both unstable libcamera and SPA interface. Someone had to decide. Note that the libcamera SPA plugin is mostly a proof-of-concept. It is meant to cover the legacy use cases, single stream, that is covered by the V4L2 SPA plugin. It is also not very "real time" friendly, as libcamera API does a lot of run-time allocation. A proper libcamera / PipeWire integration will be needed to allow configuring multiple streams on the RPi or other modern SoC (including Intel IPU3) based cameras. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
