On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 7:40 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > On 03/11/2010 03:31 PM, Devin Heitmueller wrote: >> >> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Douglas Schilling Landgraf >> <dougsland@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> On 03/10/2010 02:04 AM, hermann pitton wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Hans, both, >>>> >>>> Am Dienstag, den 09.03.2010, 08:48 +0100 schrieb Hans Verkuil: >>>>> >>>>> It's nice to see this new tree, that should be make it easier to >>>>> develop >>>>> utilities! >>>>> >>>>> After a quick check I noticed that the i2c-id.h header was copied from >>>>> the >>>>> kernel. This is not necessary. The only utility that includes this is >>>>> v4l2-dbg >>>>> and that one no longer needs it. Hans, can you remove this? >>>>> >>>>> The second question is whether anyone would object if alevt is moved >>>>> from >>>>> dvb-apps to v4l-utils? It is much more appropriate to have that tool in >>>>> v4l-utils. >>>> >>>> i wonder that this stays such calm, hopefully a good sign. >>>> >>>> In fact alevt analog should come with almost every distribution, but the >>>> former alevt-dvb, named now only alevt, well, might be ok in some >>>> future, is enhanced for doing also dvb-t-s and hence there ATM. >>>> >>>>> Does anyone know of other unmaintained but useful tools that we might >>>>> merge >>>>> into v4l-utils? E.g. xawtv perhaps? >>>> >>>> If for xawtv could be some more care, ships also since close to ever >>>> with alevtd, that would be fine, but I'm not sure we are talking about >>>> tools anymore in such case, since xawtv4x, tvtime and mpeg4ip ;) for >>>> example are also there and unmaintained. >>>> >>> >>> I think would be nice to hear a word from Devin, which have been working >>> in tvtime. Devin? >> >> Sorry, I've been sick for the last couple of days and not actively on >> email. >> >> I don't think it's a good idea to consolidate applications like xawtv >> and tvtime into the v4l2-utils codebase. The existing v4l2-utils is >> nice because it's small and what the packages provides what it says it >> does - v4l2 *utilities*. I wouldn't consider full blown tv viewing >> applications to be "utilities". >> >> The apps in question are currently packaged by multiple distros today >> as standalone packages. Today distros can decide whether they want >> the "bloat" associated with large GUI applications just to get the >> benefits of a couple of command line utilities. Bundling them >> together makes that much harder (and would also result in a package >> with lots of external dependencies on third party libraries). >> >> Adding them into v4l2-utils doesn't really solve the real problem - >> that there are very few people willing to put in the effort to >> extend/improve these applications (something which, as Douglas pointed >> out, I'm trying to improve in the case of tvtime). >> > > Ack, ACK > What would be good to do IMHO is decide for unmaintained apps like xawtv > and alevt if we want to adopt them and if we do, to create separate git > trees for them, and become a new upstream including doing regular > tarbals releases. Some time ago I did a lot of work on the Fedora xawtv > packages and I would be willing to pull such an effort for xawtv. Simply creating a tree for an application doesn't really help. At least it needs a "commitment" to that app to keep it updated. Unless, someone really puts in such an effort, creating a tree doesn't really help, it simplyt adds to the confusion for a normal user as to where he should download his application for his distro, if such a package doesn't exist. Regards, Manu -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
