I'd be very happy to see you guys join the Gnash train.
We need a Free flash player and the Free Software Foundation
will help fighting any legal obstacle.
As with gplflash, Gnash still lacks documentation of the
general architecture. It sould be very helpful to have
the "redesign" team put their time in that and provide
a form of quality control in the early stages.
Looking forward to see you aboard!
On Mon, Jan 16, 2006 at 12:49:12PM +0100, Tomas Groth wrote:
> Hi all,
> As you might have noticed there hasen't been all that much activity around
> gplflash in the last 3-6 month. This has among other thing been due to the
> developers being busy with other things, and because we wanted to find out in
> what direction gplflash should go. It has been decided that the current design
> of gplflash2 is too mesy, and that a redesign is necessary in order to make the
> code more modular, and easier to understand, maintain, and add features.
> In order to make the startup of new design/code easy we took a closer look at a
> new kid on the block: "Gnash" - a newly greated fork of gameswf. Gnash got many
> of the features we would like to see in a new gplflash; more modular, and it's
> current support for animations is quite impressive, though it's missing some
> sound support and got no support for video.
> So the design team is putting forward a suggestion to skip the gplflash2
> redesign, and instead jump on the gnash-train, since improving on gnash will
> probably be easier and more effective than starting from scratch.
> But what do you think about all this? Should we ditch the gplflash-project? Or
> shall we continue on our course with the independent re-design?
> Let the discussion begin!