Re: the awakening, license changes and so on...
Attila Kinali <[email protected]> Wed, 4 Aug 2004 09:51:46 +0900
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.video.mplayer.g2.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Moin, On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 04:43:06PM +0200, Arpi wrote: > > Is it just me or is there something burning ? > > hmm, you seems to be very cold to me nowdays... > so is this burning ice or what? :) Yeah, the temperatures outside sank below 35C... it's getting cold :) > > It would be great to have you back, but spelling out conditions at the > > beginning isnt IMHO the right thing. It sounds like we could not do > > anything w/o, so please be carefull on how you write these things. > > g2 is/was my project, i started it from scratch, and later extended > by code from g1. so i wonder why should i be very carefull when i came > back? maybe i should, if you all do a great work on it since i leave, > making it a good application, but the truth is that nobody touched the > code since that... this was my main purpose to came back, to finish > what i started. Juup...No progress whatsover :( > > BTW: did you chose this time by purpose ? Knowing that Rich is currently > > away ? > > I know that when he comes back and reads these mails that the whole > > situation will explode. (you both like flaming too much) > > i didnt know that he is away, remember i did not read the mailing lists. > anyway i dont really care of rich's flames^Kopinion... Ok, didnt expect something like this from you anyways. > - getting g2 api accepted as 'industial standard for linux/unix video/media' > something like oms, and later gstreamer and openquicktime wanted to > reach, with no much success. > we have to make it available for commercial users, otherwise they wont > spend their time developing/porting their codecs, demuxers etc for it. > - getting some money/hw/sponsorship to developers who need it to be able > to work on the code fulltime or at least more time. Why do you want to get commercial users onto MPlayer ? Just for the sponsoring ? > > > So, as you already could see, i don't count with Iive's and Rich's work > > > on vo and vf layers. If they have complete, implemented solutions, > > > i'll check, but i wont wait for them forever and keep reading the > > > utopistic drafts with mixing multiple video streams etc. > > > I guess they should work on g3 instead :) > > > > But you should count on their work. They are one of the very few people > > who know a lot about video coding and work on OSS. > > i know. but they are also the reasons why g2 is still not finished. > i can't agree any more with them making g2 api capable of every > extreme cases including mixing from multiple video sources, backward > playback and so on. i think it maybe a goal for g3, but not for g2, > or g2 will end up vaporware. ACK > > Then g1's code has a lot of design limitations, i dont think you can get > > around them w/o completely redesigning and reimplementing from scratch. > > sure. but i can get around the most important limitations. I trust your word here :) > > IMHO best would be to start with Rich's idea of a small proper designed > > core that offers the basic functionality and then extend it until you > > have what you needed and build everything else around it. > > i dont remember rich going for small simple core... he had overcomplicated > (hard/impossible to implement) vf ideas. He came up with this idea a few months ago, after you left. He never spelled it out in a mail but we talked a few times about it on irc. > > Ie exactly like g1 started, just with a proper design behind > > it and with the lessons learned. > > g1 was born as a 1,5 hours hack around libmpeg3. > later replaced by dvdshow and then libmpeg2, and after some code > coped from xmps/avifile to support divx. the whole shit was a bigugly > hack. this is what i try to avoid in g2. Juup. > > What do you want to achive? > working, usable g2 > > > How do you want to do it ? > quickly Good.. You can count on my support here. (given that i have the time :( ) > > Especialy the first one needs IMHO a clear answer. > > Please also note that neither iive, Alex nor Diego have replied to your mail > so what are the conclusions? they refuse to support me? ok... Dont know. I just noticed it and was wondering why. I know that at least Diego and iive are reading this list (alex disapears from time to time). Also Michael didnt respond. Attila Kinali