On 15/04/2012 20:59, Andres Mejia wrote:
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Eric Valette<eric.valette@free.fr> wrote:I also would like a clear explanation of the rationale behind libav versus ffmpeg. The two are diverging both in term of includes, API and probably in term of codec robustness also.Suitable answers have already been given by the main maintainer of the libav packages. See [1] and [2].
Thanks for the pointers. However:[1] only gives the reasons for the fork by one of the main libav developers, [2] suffer almost the same bias except it acknowledge that ffmpeg is somehow going faster
What do other distribution use? What number of commit, bug fix, modified/added line per month in both?I can't comment about what other distros use as I don't really follow what they do. Both libav and ffmpeg are actively developed. I don't know if anyone has done this level of analysis that you're asking however.
I prefer to trust facts than biased views. We will probably see the result in a year or two but damage will be done. I happily only use ffmpeg and cannot seriously comment on libav.
As for as codec/feature information is, I guess the "--enable-gpl" and "--enable-nonfree" that exist in ffmpeg have impacts that could also be documented.
--eric