19.11.2014 11:08, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: > 19.11.2014 10:49, David Henningsson wrote: >> >> If possible, it would make more sense to improve the library of our >> choice (probably speex) to support our needs, instead of rewriting a new >> resampler from scratch. That way, other apps using that resampler could >> also benefit from our improvements to that resampler. >> > > In general I'd agree, but that assumes that such improvements are > welcome upstream. Which is not a given. In fact, if I were an upstream > of any resampler, I'd reject such patch on the basis that pulseaudio > is the only program that needs it, and that I won't regularly test the > new functionality and won't notice if it breaks. > > Still, it does make sense to ask. Will do so for speex. Done: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/speex-dev/2014-November/008523.html -- Alexander E. Patrakov
