Re: [gentoo-dev] About time to unify 'cdda' and 'cdaudio' USE flags and make the remaining one global?
On Tue, July 7, 2009 15:35, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote: > Le mardi 07 juillet 2009 à 13:57 +0100, AllenJB a écrit : > [snip] > >> Are users really going to want to fine-tune between just playing or >> also being able to rip/write audio cd's? > > I myself would probably not separate those features but they might be > because they pull a number of different libs. I would. Ripping a cd just requires raw access to the device. You don't need anything for that, just a working kernel as far as I know. Playing cdaudio requires a lot more stuff, besides many other thing it will require a working sound system (and some even blindly assume that will be alsa, which pisses me the most). You might use a computer to rip cdaudio to fill your portable mp3 player or to do backups, that doesn't mean that you want alsa in that machine, you might not even have speakers attached. It's one example but I could think of many more, it's just a matter of being creative. > Getting informations from > cddb or musicbrainz is another story and I wouldn't like to see this > notion merged with cdaudio. Agreed. For example, those using gentoo as a base to create an OS for an embedded device will probably not have a way to lookup cddb's on the internet, and they for sure don't want to pull all of that on a device where the storage space is really limited. cddb must stay as it is, there's no reason to change that. Whether you pick cdda, cdaudio or audiocd is completely unimportant to me, the other two functionalities shouldn't have anything to do with this. Let's concentrate on the original purpose of the thread: choose what flag is the right one to designate "audio cd support", and forget the rest of creative ideas. :) -- Jesús Guerrero
Re: [gentoo-dev] About time to unify "cdda" and "cdaudio" USE flags and make the remaining one global?
Le mardi 07 juillet 2009 à 13:57 +0100, AllenJB a écrit : [snip] > Are users really going to want to fine-tune between just playing or > also being able to rip/write audio cd's? I myself would probably not separate those features but they might be because they pull a number of different libs. Getting informations from cddb or musicbrainz is another story and I wouldn't like to see this notion merged with cdaudio. > A quick check with "quse -D cdaudio cdda" (below) shows that the > current > use flag descriptions, as far as I read them, don't make any > discrepancy > between these definitions anyway - they all basically say "play audio > cd's" to me (with some additionally enabling cddb, which as a side > note > already has a global use flag) > > Current use flag descriptions: > local:cdaudio:media-plugins/audacious-plugins: Enable cd audio > playback > support > local:cdaudio:media-sound/amarok: Enable cdaudio functionality > local:cdaudio:media-sound/decibel-audio-player: Adds support for CD > audio playback and lookups via CDDB > local:cdaudio:media-sound/mpfc: Enable cd audio playback support > local:cdaudio:media-sound/picard: Enable support for CD Index > Lookups. > local:cdda:gnome-base/gvfs: Enables Compact Disc Digital Audio > (standard audio CDs) support > local:cdda:media-sound/aqualung: Enables libcdda cd audio playback > support > local:cdda:media-video/vlc: Enables audio CD and VCD playback > support. > > So ultimately, this isn't even bike shedding in my opinion. There's > only > one color to paint with anyway. agreed this sample is actually referring to the same thing. But then, it is getting confusing wrt to [1], why would we use the correct technical abbreviation in one case and not in the other ? Or should we rename jabber to gtalk ? [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=216300 -- Gilles Dartiguelongue Gentoo
Re: [gentoo-dev] About time to unify "cdda" and "cdaudio" USE flags and make the remaining one global?
Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote: > Le lundi 06 juillet 2009 à 14:18 -0700, Josh Saddler a écrit : >> Sebastian Pipping wrote: >>> Rémi Cardona wrote: And now for some bikeshedding fun, which flag are we going to keep? ;) >>> My vote would be for cdaudio as that >>> >>> - is more general (including analog playback) >>> - is more user friendly >>> >>> but let those decide who "implement" it. >> I'm also in favor of cdaudio: it's a bit more self-explanatory. I also >> think it's better to have such a generic description for apps that use >> libcdio/cdparanoia/cddb combinations, such as the package I maintain, >> media-sound/decibel-audio-player. > > As I said in [1], cdda has a precise meaning and cdaudio is all but a > blurry alternative. Also your examples are bad because they are blurring > the definition even more. Are we talking audio cdrom ripping, audio cd > data retrieving or simple audio cd playing support ? > > [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=274818#c1 > > While cdda might be the correct technical term, how many users will actually recognize what it means? Personally I think "cdaudio" (or, to throw in another alternative "audiocd") would be recognized by most users as support for playing audio cd's (as in the things you buy in the shops and stick into any stereo made in the last 15+ years). Are users really going to want to fine-tune between just playing or also being able to rip/write audio cd's? A quick check with "quse -D cdaudio cdda" (below) shows that the current use flag descriptions, as far as I read them, don't make any discrepancy between these definitions anyway - they all basically say "play audio cd's" to me (with some additionally enabling cddb, which as a side note already has a global use flag) Current use flag descriptions: local:cdaudio:media-plugins/audacious-plugins: Enable cd audio playback support local:cdaudio:media-sound/amarok: Enable cdaudio functionality local:cdaudio:media-sound/decibel-audio-player: Adds support for CD audio playback and lookups via CDDB local:cdaudio:media-sound/mpfc: Enable cd audio playback support local:cdaudio:media-sound/picard: Enable support for CD Index Lookups. local:cdda:gnome-base/gvfs: Enables Compact Disc Digital Audio (standard audio CDs) support local:cdda:media-sound/aqualung: Enables libcdda cd audio playback support local:cdda:media-video/vlc: Enables audio CD and VCD playback support. So ultimately, this isn't even bike shedding in my opinion. There's only one color to paint with anyway. AllenJB
Re: [gentoo-dev] About time to unify "cdda" and "cdaudio" USE flags and make the remaining one global?
Le lundi 06 juillet 2009 à 14:18 -0700, Josh Saddler a écrit : > Sebastian Pipping wrote: > > Rémi Cardona wrote: > >> And now for some bikeshedding fun, which flag are we going to keep? ;) > > > > My vote would be for cdaudio as that > > > > - is more general (including analog playback) > > - is more user friendly > > > > but let those decide who "implement" it. > > I'm also in favor of cdaudio: it's a bit more self-explanatory. I also > think it's better to have such a generic description for apps that use > libcdio/cdparanoia/cddb combinations, such as the package I maintain, > media-sound/decibel-audio-player. As I said in [1], cdda has a precise meaning and cdaudio is all but a blurry alternative. Also your examples are bad because they are blurring the definition even more. Are we talking audio cdrom ripping, audio cd data retrieving or simple audio cd playing support ? [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=274818#c1
Re: [gentoo-dev] About time to unify "cdda" and "cdaudio" USE flags and make the remaining one global?
Sebastian Pipping wrote: > Rémi Cardona wrote: >> And now for some bikeshedding fun, which flag are we going to keep? ;) > > My vote would be for cdaudio as that > > - is more general (including analog playback) > - is more user friendly > > but let those decide who "implement" it. I'm also in favor of cdaudio: it's a bit more self-explanatory. I also think it's better to have such a generic description for apps that use libcdio/cdparanoia/cddb combinations, such as the package I maintain, media-sound/decibel-audio-player. I'm all for cdaudio over cdda. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] About time to unify "cdda" and "cdaudio" USE flags and make the remaining one global?
Rémi Cardona wrote: > And now for some bikeshedding fun, which flag are we going to keep? ;) My vote would be for cdaudio as that - is more general (including analog playback) - is more user friendly but let those decide who "impkement" it. Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] About time to unify "cdda" and "cdaudio" USE flags and make the remaining one global?
Le 05/07/2009 03:12, Sebastian Pipping a écrit : Lars Wendler wrote: So what do you think? Should we convert the bug into a tracker and open bugs for any package using the USE-flag that should be converted into the other one? +1 from me, sounds reasonable. Ditto, sounds good. And now for some bikeshedding fun, which flag are we going to keep? ;) Cheers, Rémi
Re: [gentoo-dev] About time to unify "cdda" and "cdaudio" USE flags and make the remaining one global?
Lars Wendler wrote: > So what do you think? Should we convert the bug into a tracker and open bugs > for any package using the USE-flag that should be converted into the other > one? +1 from me, sounds reasonable. Sebastian
[gentoo-dev] About time to unify "cdda" and "cdaudio" USE flags and make the remaining one global?
Hi list, while finally doing some bug-wrangling again, I stumbled about [1] where a user requested to unify "cdda" and "cdaudio" USE flags. After leaving a request for further opinions about this in #-bugs I only got one reply: 14:11:28 <+Poly-C_atwork> Any idea what to do about bug #274818? Is there some real distinction between cdaudio and cdda? If no would it be worth to request the removal of one of these two flags in favor of the other one? ... 16:16:25 <+yngwin> Poly-C_atwork: looks to me that cdda and cdaudio are indeed the same 16:16:38 <+yngwin> and together they are used in 8 packages 16:16:46 <+yngwin> so it's time for a global use flag 16:17:04 <+yngwin> as cdda is the official term, that has my preference So what do you think? Should we convert the bug into a tracker and open bugs for any package using the USE-flag that should be converted into the other one? [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/274818 -- Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C) Gentoo Staffer and bug-wrangler signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
