| 1 |
On Sat, 2 Mar 2013 14:54:22 +0800 |
| 2 |
Ben de Groot <yngwin@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> media-video/avidemux (bundled libs) |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
I like this application, but am not so sure about maintaining this... =/ |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Would it be reasonable to create a new package avidemux-ffmpeg in which |
| 9 |
we create a version of ffmpeg with their patches applied? Perhaps we |
| 10 |
can also remove the parts of ffmpeg that aren't used by avidemux to |
| 11 |
keep the overhead of having ffmpeg twice on the system low. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I don't see any other reliable solution, unless upstream is willing to |
| 14 |
stop bundling ffmpeg and get their patches incorporated on that. |
| 15 |
But upon reading the progress on Debian, there is barely any progress |
| 16 |
on that as far as I am aware of; and I'm not willing to maintain a |
| 17 |
package that has 1) an unpatched ffmpeg that breaks it for people or |
| 18 |
2) a bundled ffmpeg that keeps it from getting unmasked / reliable / ... |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
The other approach is for someone to attempt to try to get all these |
| 21 |
patches upstream, but some of them are undocumented which makes it hard |
| 22 |
to understand what the changes actually are done for; and at this point |
| 23 |
in time it is not guaranteed that ffmpeg would take these patches. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
So, what is the Qt herd's opinion on creating a avidemux-ffmpeg package? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
With kind regards, |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Tom Wijsman (TomWij) |
| 31 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
E-mail address : TomWij@g.o |
| 34 |
GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D |
| 35 |
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D |
Archives