On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 11:19:16PM +0000, Iain * wrote: > On 3/13/06, Aaron Bockover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > f) Must be portable, should be written in C; by portable I mean... > > Windows, OS X, other Unixes. > > While I'm not against it being deliberatly portable to Windows or OSX, > can I ask why you think this is such an essential element?
I think it might encourage free software on windows, so those who are say making mono based gtk+ music players could still use the same backend. > Is it really likely that we'll get the big 3 (itunes, windows media > player,winamp) to use it and I don't actually know anyone who uses a > different player on these systems (this is not a call for a flood of > emails saying "my best friend's cousin's gran's dog's neighbour uses > XYZPlayer" or similar anecdotal claims) Not likely, but those products are products we want to replace with free software anyways. But those who we do replace, having a common backend to encourage different flavours of players is a good thing. > I just think that for thing that has limited scope to open source > media players that run on unix, spending our time making it portable > sounds like time that could be better spent on other things...if > someone on Windows wants to port it (and contribute patches back) let > them, but we've got finite resources here, so lets use them in the > best possible way. I agree that it's a lesser goal but we should keep it open so that we can encourage replacements and perhaps we can get them to convert to a real desktop. :-) The pain of migration will be a lot less since the same applications are available. sri _______________________________________________ gnome-multimedia mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-multimedia
