On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 16:17:41 +0100 Tomas Frydrych <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 22/06/10 16:04, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > On 6/22/2010 7:45 AM, Tomas Frydrych wrote: > >> On 22/06/10 15:22, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > >> > >>> "Normal" applications are expected to just use the Qt Multimedia > >>> APIs to play media, and not talk to gstreamer directly. > >>> However, at the same time we realize that specialist type of > >>> applications may want to have more finegrained and detailed > >>> control than the Qt Multimedia API allows (which is somewhat of > >>> an abstraction after all), so we have > >>> to allow direct access to gstreamer as well, to not make really > >>> interesting applications impossible. > >>> > >> Which kind of opens the whole question of what is the point > >> providing an extra abstraction on the top of the GStreamer > >> abstraction in the first place, does it not ? > >> > > > > No it doesn't; if all you want to do is play some movie or sound, > > the Qt Mobility is more than plenty. > > That completely misses the point; what would be a sound engineering > reason for using an extra abstraction, A sound engineering reason is to enable better portability of applications to and from your preferred platform. Applications that do not need gstreamer specifics, and want to work on platforms where there is no gstreamer. -- Bernd Stramm <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
