On Apr 29, 2013, at 9:59 AM, Claudio Freire <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Note that native aac encoder is experimental and mostly useless.
> 
> I see...
> ...I always understood "experimental" as "immature" but "will get
> there someday". I'm guessing I misunderstood?


As constructive feedback, I recommend removing aac entirely from the codebase 
if this is the case: "experimental" has a ring similar to "beta" or "on the 
way" -- like Claudio, I didn't derive "useless" and in effect disavowed from 
"experimental". If this is indeed the lay of the land with aac, and it is going 
to be left in, I'd put that in big bold letters in the doc or FAQ somewhere, 
along with DO NOT USE FOR PRODUCTION CODE. Otherwise, others may think that 
they are basically being early adopters of a codec that is going to be 
progressively improving, so if the experimental condition of the codec solves 
functions fine for their use-case, they would expect nothing but eventual 
improvement to it. 

I'd also be interested in what other codecs, if any, fall into this category so 
that I steer clear. If there is a doc listing which ones are considered 
production-ready and will be supported going forward, and which ones won't be, 
that would be a great reference...

Brad


_______________________________________________
Libav-user mailing list
[email protected]
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-user

Reply via email to