On Apr 16, 2012 3:59 AM, "Fabian Greffrath" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Am 15.04.2012 21:23, schrieb Eric Valette: > >> Thanks for the pointers. However: >> [1] only gives the reasons for the fork by one of the main libav >> developers, > > > As he is also one of the most active libav maintainers in Debian, it's a natural choice to follow his route for the Debian packages as well. > > >> [2] suffer almost the same bias except it acknowledge that ffmpeg is >> somehow going faster > > > More commits and releases do not necessarily mean better code.
I agree. Also it looks as though the ffmpeg devs have lowered their quality standards in an attempt to compete with libav. There have been questionable changes and features merged in ffmpeg with little or no review. Anyway, ffmpeg devs have largely been merging everything from libav, so of course it's going to look like ffmpeg is ahead. > >> I prefer to trust facts than biased views. We will probably see the >> result in a year or two but damage will be done. I happily only use >> ffmpeg and cannot seriously comment on libav. > > > Sorry, but you'll have to find out these "facts" by yourself. So far, I have not experienced any problem with libav and do not feel to miss anything from ffmpeg. > > >> As for as codec/feature information is, I guess the "--enable-gpl" and >> "--enable-nonfree" that exist in ffmpeg have impacts that could also >> be documented. > > > They are shortly documented in debian/confflags, exactly where these flags are enabled (or not, in case of --enable-nonfree). Or what else do you mean? > > - Fabian > > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] > Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected] >
