Kjetil Svalastog Matheussen wrote: >The sources are to different. Ceres3 only supports mono-files and is >very non-thread-safe. > Ceres3 will load L, R, or L+R stereo files. Its thread safety is probably not so good. >There are two options, either implement the missing features in ceres >to ceres3, or the missing features in ceres3 to ceres1. >Both are quite much work, but I think the last one is the least. > I think your version is the one to keep up-to-date. Libsndfile support is important, as is JACK support. I can start sending you comments regarding the major differences between Ceres and Ceres3 if you like. >?yvind Hammer has been working on Ceres in all years, the latest version >(0.15) was released in 2001 if I remember correctly, before I took over. >Even then, it compaired fairly to ceres3. So he never >stopped the development of ceres, still other people released both >ceres2, ceres2w and ceres3. I don't know why, perhaps they had good reasons. > I had many email exchanges with Dr Hammer during that period. The other versions had his blessings, he was I think too busy to add things like WAV file support and stereo file support, and many bugs were not being addressed. IIRC he was doing more work in paleontology. We occasionally discussed dinosaurs too... :) >A superceres would be nice, but the fork happened for a very very long >time ago, and an integration is not an easy task. > I can see that integrating the codebases would be problematic, but it might still be helpful to see what actually remains in Ceres3 that has not yet made it into your code. I'll try to do a more serious comparison this week and will send the results to you if you want them. Btw, thank you for all your excellent work in Linux audio software. I don't know if many people realize how much you've contributed, but I do, so thank you very much. :) Best regards, dp
