From: Joachim K. <Joa...@te...> - 2001-04-26 12:49:37
|
Hi everybody, for some time now the CVS does not compile. I understand that lots of changes in the design have been done, but why is there no progress anymore. It looks like xine development does sleep at the moment. I have prepared some changes for the alsa driver and want to implement that in CVS. Also I want to adopt the alsa driver to the 0.9.0 version. We are at a critical time period right now. Xine is almost ready for the big screen and right now it slows down together with a major change in the design. The result is that we currently have no public development and this may result in developers going other ways. I do not want to have a OMS like situation. Don't get me wrong, I like xine very much, but please can someone explain me why is it not possible to get CVS working again. I would like to work for xine, but that should have a working CVS at least. The must be versions that do compile, how else could there be (private) development. Please check this into CVS. Any comments are welcome, but done flame me, it would not help. mfg Joachim |
From: Guenter B. <bar...@st...> - 2001-04-26 18:53:25
|
Hi Joachim, hi list, On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Joachim Koenig wrote: > for some time now the CVS does not compile. true, I don't like this situation either. But, the code as it was to me looked like a dead end. Too many hacks, too many different coding styles, no clear interface, not extensible. I tried to change this gradually, but I failed each time I tried it and always ended up with changing all the interfaces and it always lead to what we're doing now, this complete code-review and to some degree code-rewrite. This is the big step from an experiment/hack (what xine really was) to a real project that is clean, stable. extensible and modularized. > I understand that lots of changes in the design have been done, but > why is there no progress anymore. It looks like xine development does > sleep at the moment. This is simply not true, I did my last commits just yesterday evening. I always hoped more people would join the developement process, that's why I postet from time to time about the new architecture, but only Daniel did. On the other hand, he did a great job, the split-up is nearly complete, the new tarballs are nearly finished. BTW: we dropped xine-output, the output-plugins from there come with xine-lib now. oki, perhaps this is a nice opportunity to summit the current status of xine-cvs, module-by-module xine-lib: compiles, but very limited set of plugins only (no audio decoder/output plugins, that's the biggest problem) xine-ui: compiles nearly, working heavily on it so we finally have a main.c and thus a xine-executable and can start with debugging xine-output : deprecated xine : the old code, developement stopped besides that, we did some developer-doce, so we'll have a "xine-hackers guide~ (describing the new xine architecture and how to implement plugins) soon. > I have prepared some changes for the alsa driver and want to implement > that in CVS. well, then go ahead! as I staed above, we don't have a single audio output plugin yet, so this would really help :-) > The result is that we currently have no public development sorry, but this is simply not true. The CVS is broken because we do this developement in full public, I commited every little change over the past weeks (and there has been a lot of progress from Daniel as well as from my side) to CVS. I don't see where the problem is, apart from the one that nobody else wanted to take part in this effort. I know, without a working code base it's not that motivating to join the efforts, but that's the nature of such a big cleanup and API-change. However, I hope that people will take over certain plugins as soon as xine works again. > Don't get me wrong, I like xine very much, but please can someone explain me > why is it not possible to get CVS working again. it is possible, but it's also a lot of work and since there are only two people working on it (in their spare time !) this takes it's time. I can only state once again: I was always here and I will stay here and I'm working on this code. I can't wait to have a working xine again (even though this will only be the start of some hard debugging-time ;)), but let's do the right thing (tm) this time, clean, modular code with clear interfaces, that's the goal. Thanks for your patience. Cheers, Guenter -- time is a funny concept |
From: <wa...@zo...> - 2001-04-30 18:48:54
|
Hey guenter :) Nice to see you're alive. I havent been able to contribute anything last two months, but I'm getting my cable modem this wednesday so hopefully I'll be able to start working again soon. On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 08:52:43PM +0200, Guenter Bartsch wrote: > I tried to change this gradually, but I failed each time I tried it and > always ended up with changing all the interfaces and it always lead to > what we're doing now, this complete code-review and to some degree > code-rewrite. Cleanups do matter. Dont feel bad for spending time on this. > This is simply not true, I did my last commits just yesterday evening. I > always hoped more people would join the developement process, that's why I > postet from time to time about the new architecture, but only Daniel > did. On the other hand, he did a great job, the split-up is nearly > complete, the new tarballs are nearly finished. Hmm. I feel the same about mpeg2dec at times. I guess I should start working on sync soon (how long have I been saying this ? gosh), maybe at that time we should try to work more closely together. You've been one of the few people I got feedback from and I appreciate this. (But I'm still waiting for that patch ;-b) -- Michel "Walken" LESPINASSE Of course I think I'm right. If I thought I was wrong, I'd change my mind. |
From: Guenter B. <bar...@st...> - 2001-04-30 19:23:57
|
Hi Michel, On Mon, 30 Apr 2001, Michel Lespinasse wrote: > Nice to see you're alive. good to hear from you too :-) > Hmm. I feel the same about mpeg2dec at times. I guess I should start > working on sync soon (how long have I been saying this ? gosh), maybe > at that time we should try to work more closely together. You've been > one of the few people I got feedback from and I appreciate this. (But > I'm still waiting for that patch ;-b) right, that patch is not forgotten at all. We have the current libmpeg2 in our CVS now as weel as the new video_out - interface, so we're really close. In fact, I could create that diff right now, but the code has never been tried until now (well, in fact, it's running in gdb on the other machine, the new xine compiles and runs now, can't take much more time until I see the first frames displayed :-)). I've heard that there is a seperate libvo project in livid (unfortunately I haven't heard from Aaenas since he mailed me a few weeks ago) - perhaps we could find some common api here. The video_out-interface in xine and the functions in the output-drivers have been improved again, I really think there could be some contributions from our side. There are, however some basic questions we need to clearify first. Most of them regard what functions we want to have in that libvo - does it handle syncing? does it do some sort of frame-buffering? Cheers, Guenter -- time is a funny concept |
From: <wa...@zo...> - 2001-05-01 02:59:42
|
On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 09:23:45PM +0200, Guenter Bartsch wrote: > good to hear from you too :-) :) New job, new appartment, new everything. Except for that old crappy car that seems to be falling appart. Oh well :) > right, that patch is not forgotten at all. We have the current libmpeg2 in > our CVS now as weel as the new video_out - interface, so we're really > close. In fact, I could create that diff right now, but the code has never > been tried until now (well, in fact, it's running in gdb on the other > machine, the new xine compiles and runs now, can't take much more time > until I see the first frames displayed :-)). OK, tell me how it goes. > I've heard that there is a seperate libvo project in livid (unfortunately > I haven't heard from Aaenas since he mailed me a few weeks ago) - perhaps > we could find some common api here. The video_out-interface in xine and > the functions in the output-drivers have been improved again, I really > think there could be some contributions from our side. There are, however > some basic questions we need to clearify first. Most of them regard what > functions we want to have in that libvo - does it handle syncing? does it > do some sort of frame-buffering? Actually I'm not clear on the status of the livid-libvo thing right now. I'm under the impression that since I left for vacation everyone stopped working on livid. Two monthes ago they had some prototype code but with lots of holes still. What I agreed on is that if they do a set of plugins that I can load I will use these, but I will still keep my own code for the debugging output modules and at least one display output module. That way I dont have to depend on their project for libmpeg2 coding and debugging. -- Michel "Walken" LESPINASSE Of course I think I'm right. If I thought I was wrong, I'd change my mind. |