Re: FFmpeg vs. libav packaging (was Re: Proposal: SystemD.pushers/forcers, et cetera)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 2014-02-13 14:43, The Wanderer wrote:
> I was not aware that the decision of whether to go with libav or
> with FFmpeg had involved any consideration at all of which one was
> better, only consideration of which one had someone available who
> was willing to do the packaging work.
>
> Specifically, it was my impression at the time that Reinhard
> Tartler had been the primary person packaging FFmpeg for Debian,
> that he was part of the group that chose to fork FFmpeg into libav,
> that he naturally chose to switch to packaging the forked version
> because he was aligned with that fork, and that no one else stepped
> up to be willing to package FFmpeg in his place.
To me this pretty much qualifies as "libav is better than ffmpeg
because libav is maintained in debian and ffmpeg is not".
If both branches would have been maintained in more or less equal
spirit I don't think we would have dropped one of them. And probably
would have had a wider discussion on which of the two to provide in
the archive based on merits and differences.
I see connections to the MySQL vs MariaDB package effort in this. Just
that we didn't jump to MariaDB - it has been brought in later because
people are doing the ground work to have it in the archive.
- --
brother
http://sis.bthstudent.se
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJS/NtEAAoJEJbdSEaj0jV7I6oH/2c7tBcoMe+zr4JHvOi8owsK
VHPfwYYr+d389dZEko7SFb8gYp9YJUEXyAnrzAmrRGw/s3552a1p/91qhzCd+a+W
j8X/rjqmK3wXK1+59hiR2rNaHh1tcZOKafbqRgGilmkMBK02xt81QMGTGKBfKjbx
Gl3vXKFmeqbTz53UIpencga0l5wfRCi95bjqiBwFGBiZ1rKDsx0EKzKbF+4RZbb3
HjzTsDJNsKf65YPrkcabDMNI9abog2oWb9u2790Pee8QAY7fgLK5pLZcnHGz0j4c
kG9S2QzAKhNujDCFf4cw6ZWCiZxqWCz8JYUB7u0clvEpiuciLtV3FTr3YVo/BGY=
=C9E4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: