[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] the future of libamr
Sun Jun 7 12:38:42 CEST 2009
Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 06, 2009 at 07:20:09PM +0100, Robert Swain wrote:
>> Diego Biurrun wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 02:21:23PM +0100, Robert Swain wrote:
>>>> OK, then I guess the only issue is a feature regression in that
>>>> libopencore-amrwb doesn't do encoding. As Diego points out, there's
>>>> nothing stopping people from using FFmpeg 0.5 or a version of svn from
>>>> before the libamr reference wrapper gets removed, but I'm not really
>>>> fond of feature regressions. Is there any good reason not to keep the
>>>> libamr-wb reference encoder wrapper?
>>> May I suggest that you read the 25+ messages in this thread before
>>> restarting the discussion at square one? Pros and cons have already
>>> been hashed out extensively and a consensus seemed to have been reached.
>>> If you have anything new to add, reply to the relevant subthread. Just
>>> raising the same concerns over and over again is inconstructive and
>>> leads nowhere.
>> I had actually read them but had forgotten about them as I was out of
>> the country so, I apologise for this. However, I didn't see a deadline
>> set for consensus to be reached.
>> Benoit had some reservations about feature regression then decided it
>> was OK, though I don't see him mention any compelling reason why he
>> changed his mind other than that removing non-free components is good.
>> Then Baptiste commented that he wasn't too keen on a feature regression
>> and you stated that it seemed a consensus had been reached. Then 3 days
>> after Baptiste's comment, you committed the OpenCORE support and said
>> you were going to remove libamr. A consensus has not been reached if not
>> everyone has accepted the same idea and it seems not everyone has.
>> I'm not sure how many people actually use AMR-WB encoding. I would guess
>> the parties interested would be mostly commercial.
>> I don't really know what option is best. It's non-free but removing it
>> would be a feature regression. Why did we have the AMR reference
>> implementation wrapped in the first place if not having non-free stuff
>> in FFmpeg was a major concern versus not having the feature?
> Quoting myself:
> Pros and cons have already been hashed out extensively and a consensus
> seemed to have been reached. If you have anything new to add, reply
> to the relevant subthread. Just raising the same concerns over and
> over again is inconstructive and leads nowhere.
> Of course it's a feature regression. But luckily there is no law
> against it. All you need are good reasons. We have done it before.
> There are good reasons now, so we can do it again.
No solid consensus was reached and there _was_ opposition to a
consensus. I replied to the most appropriate e-mail because I would like
a response from you.
"Efforts should be made to remove non-free components from FFmpeg.
Feature regressions are an acceptable cost for removal of said
components." - Should this be a new FFmpeg policy?
More information about the ffmpeg-devel