Bug#682010: [mumble] Communication failures due to CELT codec library removal

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Chris Knadle writes ("Re: Bug#682010: [mumble] Communication failures due to CELT codec library removal"):
> On Monday, July 23, 2012 10:34:28, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Philipp Kern writes ("Re: Bug#682010: [mumble] Communication failures due to 
> CELT codec library removal"):
> > > On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 06:31:27PM -0400, Chris Knadle wrote:
> > > >    1) Fix up "348" from Wheezy so it compiles and uses the CELT
> > > >    
> > > >       codec library [very undesirable]
> > > >    
> > > >    2) Same as 1) but with embedded CELT (would need testing)
> > > >    3) drop mumble from Wheezy
> > 
> > Of these 2. would seem to be the best option.
> 
> I agree.
> 
> Pros:
>   - Solution should work for both Wheezy and Sid
>     (-2 in Sid currently has no celt support, and celt is the most widely
>      used codec in mumble on the 'net)
>   - Would use celt 0.7 as well as 0.11

I'm not sure I follow this.  Are you saying that enabling the embedded
celt would necessarily involve enabling /two/ versions of celt ?  (And
you mention `0.7' and `0.11' neither of which are the same as `0.7.1'
so I'm confused about that too.)

Surely we want to avoid having multiple different versions if at all
possible.  Is it essential to support anything other than 0.7.1 ?
I thought upstream had declared 0.7.1 to be a baseline so that would
be sufficient.

And if 0.7.1 is sufficient, can it be done using an embedded copy
right now with a build system change, or would we have to dump a
special copy of celt 0.7.1 into the mumble source package ?

> Cons:
>   - Larger diff in mumble

Is it in fact a substantial diff ?  I thought it was essentially a
configure option.

>   - Would greatly irritate mumble maintainer

Rather than consider someone's emotional state, I'd rather focus on
their views.  That is, if this is a bad idea according to the mumble
maintainers then I'd like to hear why they think so.

> > Personally I don't think there is much to prefer between 1 and 2.  Is
> > all that's stopping us from fixing this is overcoming our resistance
> > to an embedded library copy ?  If so I think we should just go ahead.
> 
> Pros:
>   - Smaller diff in mumble
> Cons:
>   - Only uses celt 0.7

See above.

Thanks,
Ian.