youtube-dl: drop package, yt-dlp: add package

[paper42]

Maintainer: me, @BKPepe
Compile tested: armv7, Turris Omnia, OpenWrt 21.02
Run tested: armv7, Turris Omnia, OpenWrt 21.02

Description:
youtube-dl is still maintained, but moves very slowly and many other distributions instead package an active fork, yt-dlp.

@BKPepe would you be ok with me adopting this package?
cc @diizzyy

[BKPepe]

@BKPepe would you be ok with me adopting this package?

Yes, thank you.

[diizzyy]

Are these deps all?
https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports/tree/www/yt-dlp/Makefile#n11

[paper42]

I removed setuptools because they don't use it and added relevant python3 stdlib dependencies.

Dependencies in distributions are all optional. On my computer, I can download a youtube video with yt-dlp with just python3 installed. If I wanted the best audio and video quality, I would have to install ffmpeg because audio and video files need to be downloaded separately and then combined.

https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp#dependencies

[paper42]

Void Linux (where I maintain yt-dlp) and Alpine Linux only have python in dependencies, Arch and maybe other distributions only have python-certifi (which is also optional) in dependencies.

[jefferyto]

I don't see why youtube-dl has to be dropped for yt-dlp to be added. I checked Debian/Ubuntu, Fedora, and Arch Linux, they have packages for both.

[BKPepe]

I am in favor to drop youtube-dl and move it to abandoned-packages. It will save some build time, HW resources and we don't need to maintain both versions. There might be some cases, when youtube-dl might have sense, but most likely for Python 2.x versions. Reference: ytdl-org/youtube-dl#30568 (comment) and ytdl-org/youtube-dl#30613 (comment)

[jefferyto]

@BKPepe I think users may want to use the "original" youtube-dl and the project appears alive again with a new maintainer, but it's your package so you get to decide 😂

[BKPepe]

Hmm. That's not very helpful, though! My problem is that I don't want really to maintain both versions. :-( On the other hand, sometimes there are added packages used by just one user, which is terrible.

Right now, I see yt-dlp as a replacement for youtube-dl, which does not release as often as it did in the past. We can re-introduce youtube-dl later if someone wants, too.

Fewer packages to maintain, then better for me. Maybe, it will help if in the commit description in dropping package for youtube-dl there will be the same what is in the PR description to have a better history.

[diizzyy]

Yes, just create a symlink and be done with it.
https://cgit.freebsd.org/ports/tree/www/yt-dlp/Makefile#n41

[paper42]

Yes, just create a symlink and be done with it. cgit.freebsd.org/ports/tree/www/yt-dlp/Makefile#n41

I think that pretending that yt-dlp is youtube-dl is a bad idea, it's a fork and mostly compatible, but it's not youtube-dl, for example the config location is ~/.config/yt-dlp, not ~/.config/youtube-dl and if the user installs youtube-dl and uses the youtube-dl command, they will be surprised that the config location is suddenly different.

[jefferyto]

If the user installed a package called "yt-dlp", they can probably guess the command is called yt-dlp.

I suppose this could use the ALTERNATIVES mechanism to provide the youtube-dl binary, but if youtube-dl is removed from the feed then there is only one "alternative". Plus this would be more complicated than it needs to be right now.

[diizzyy]

@paper42
I disagree, it's more compatibility glue for various applications that uses youtube-dl (that aren't very active)