-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Steve Long wrote:
> Duncan wrote:
> 
>> Steve Dibb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
>> excerpted below, on  Wed, 10 Oct 2007 07:55:01 -0600:
>>
>>> The reason we have mp3 and lame use flag is because there is more than
>>> one mp3 encoder.  In almost every case of the use flag being applied
>>> above, there is already support for another mp3 codec (ffmpeg).  So,
>>> lame adds support for lame, not for mp3, which is also provided.
>> In that case, shouldn't the description mention that?  Something like:
>>
>> MP3 encoding support using LAME (as opposed to ffmpeg)
>>
> What about when the next one gets added-- would it need to say "as opposed
> to ffmpeg or lame"?
> 
> I agree where there's a choice, the ebuild should offer lame or ffmpeg or
> w/e, and where not simply mp3 (along with the encode/decode being
> orthogonal.)

what about mp3=lame or mp3=ffmpeg? This will also be easily extendable when
the next implementations comes along (mp3=newmp3lib).

Marijn

- --
Marijn Schouten (hkBst), Gentoo Lisp project
<http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHD03xp/VmCx0OL2wRAgIxAJ47l1Y0IdL3n/GGKPYoiYW2Ec/IAwCeIDxp
mNGh5idhB7qUVEDQb3Y65sI=
=dwdN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list

Reply via email to