Provide online documentation for stable and git/master

[Elliott]

Summary of the bug:
When I try to use the pullup filter, it says [AVFilterGraph @ 0x7fa8c2c12f20] No such filter: 'pullup'
How to reproduce:

% ffmpeg -i NCIS.ts -ss 300 -t 30 -vf pullup,fps=24000/1001 -an -vcodec libx264 -preset ultrafast pullup.mp4

ffmpeg version 2.0.1
built on Sep 25 2013 06:03:35 with Apple clang version 4.1 (tags/Apple/clang-421.11.66) (based on LLVM 3.1svn)
  configuration: --prefix=/opt/local --enable-swscale --enable-avfilter --enable-avresample --enable-libmp3lame --enable-libvorbis --enable-libopus --enable-libtheora --enable-libschroedinger --enable-libopenjpeg --enable-libmodplug --enable-libvpx --enable-libspeex --enable-libass --enable-libbluray --enable-gnutls --enable-libfreetype --disable-outdev=xv --mandir=/opt/local/share/man --enable-shared --enable-pthreads --cc=/usr/bin/clang --arch=x86_64 --enable-yasm --enable-gpl --enable-postproc --enable-libx264 --enable-libxvid

[Clément Bœsch]

This is because the online documentation is for git/master only (with a delay of about 24 hours).

IMO, we should provide documentation for latest stable and git/master.

[Elliott]

I agree, or highlight/notate in some way the differences.
Any idea when the next stable version will be released?

[Elon Musk]

Git version is most stable version.

[Carl Eugen Hoyos]

I honestly wonder if this is really an enhancement that we should put effort into: We ship every release with documentation that contains the features of the release and we explicitly ask users on the website to use current git head (both on the download and the bug reporting page) so I wonder why a user expects to find documentation for outdated versions on the website.

[Clément Bœsch]

Replying to cehoyos:

I honestly wonder if this is really an enhancement that we should put effort into: We ship every release with documentation that contains the features of the release and we explicitly ask users on the website to use current git head (both on the download and the bug reporting page) so I wonder why a user expects to find documentation for outdated versions on the website.

People tend to like communication (the fools...) and point out links to the documentation (on forums, irc, or whatever online medium). To help a random user with a given version (assuming it's a recent enough "snapshot"), it's nice to be able to point out to a documentation matching their version (and it's simpler for everyone to just click a link than looking for a particular section in the manpage. FFmpeg is not packaged with the HTML doc.

[Elliott]

I'm a video engineer, not a programmer. I see a doc folder in the release tarball, but I don't see anything there that's easy to read. There are a bunch of .texi files which I assume should be read with some special program. It would be nice to have an explanation somewhere of how to read all this documentation.

[Stefano Sabatini]

Replying to spookybathtub:

I'm a video engineer, not a programmer. I see a doc folder in the release tarball, but I don't see anything there that's easy to read. There are a bunch of .texi files which I assume should be read with some special program. It would be nice to have an explanation somewhere of how to read all this documentation.

make doc will generate the docs (in various formats, depending on your environment).

And really FFmpeg docs are not so hard if you have a few key notions in digital media and a basic familiarity with software environments (which is not at all specific of FFmpeg), but requires some effort and the will to do some research, which is not really different from everything else in the professional / technical fields.

[Carl Eugen Hoyos]

Replying to spookybathtub:

I'm a video engineer, not a programmer. I see a doc folder in the release tarball, but I don't see anything there that's easy to read.

As said, if you are not a distributor (but a user) please use a tarball of current git head, this matches the online documentation.

[llogan]

Replying to ubitux:

it's nice to be able to point out to a documentation matching their version

One downside that I envision is that users will likely blindly arrive at any official online docs that Google directs them to and will not pay attention to nor notice any version information (unless herded by a developer, contributor, or volunteer). Most users are not idiots, but they are like water and will travel the path of least resistance to get the information they (think they) want.

FFmpeg is not packaged with the HTML doc.

Perhaps we should provide HTML docs if it is a sane possibility (I am unfamiliar with the process so I may be missing something obvious).