On 03/21/2013 08:05 AM, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > On Thu, 2013-03-21 at 05:40 +0100, David Henningsson wrote: >> On 03/20/2013 04:45 PM, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> The target release date for 4.0 is 2013-04-18 (assuming 4-month release >>> cycle), and that date is less than a month away. It's time to freeze >>> soon. I propose 2013-03-28 as the freeze date - that would leave us 3 >>> weeks to polish the release. >> >> Well, we should first release 3.1 with the stuff in the stable-3.x >> branch. I think that can be done right away. > > OK. I guess it's mostly up to Arun to do that. > >> Other than that, I don't think I have any bigger objections. I would >> like to push the buffer patches posted yesterday together with something >> that documents maxlength as being okay to set in low-latency scenarios. >> I could write that documentation patch this week if you can do some review. > > I can. > >> Providing "real underrun" callbacks (which the drain patch lays the >> foundations for) would probably have to wait until a later release. > > Yep. BTW, I have forgotten why we need "real underrun" notifications. Is > the application expected to do something different on real underruns > than on stream buffer underruns? IMO, it's the current underflow messages that are useless. According to the notes we however agreed to to add a new callback rather than replacing the current one. Anyway, VLC once used an underflow as a sign that audio/video needed resynchronisation. Finding out that the underflow callback in most cases wasn't a real underrun, they chose to ignore the underflow instead, just like most other applications out there do. > >> Are we in the midst of something w r t to any other area, such as bluez? > > I don't think so. > -- David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd. https://launchpad.net/~diwic
