On Wed, 2002-03-20 at 11:15, Trent Piepho wrote: > > They don't *have* a pluggable backend, if they have a backend *at all*. > > Exactly my point again. You don't like their architecture and think they need > to do everything your way. They don't like your way and want to do stuff > their way. Thus, two separate projects. It's no wonder there hundreds of > separate projects, when everyone has this "it's my way or the highway" > attitude.
Many people have joined the project, so at least some people seem to agree with the gstreamer way of doing it. Yes, there's other ways. But you'll have to admit that the mplayer architecture isn't the nicest way f doing it, by design that is. There's no plugin function (i.e. no possibility for external sources), no possible way of making pre-built binaries that will work on any platform (because of the 'all-in-one-executable-design')... Anyway, I'm sure their project is cool, just not my style ;-). > Eventually one project will get so much more attention than the others that it > will become the de facto standard. I hope so - linux needs a default multimedia architecture... Ronald -- - .-. - /V\ | Ronald Bultje <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - // \\ | Running: Linux 2.4.18-XFS and OpenBSD 3.0 - /( )\ | http://ronald.bitfreak.net/ - ^^-^^ _______________________________________________ Video4linux-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/video4linux-list
