Hi, Tomas Frydrych wrote: > 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 ?
Developers will use what's simplest for them, as long as it works well. If GStreamer offers a really simple way to play media, and developers can easily integrate it into their application, then they'll use it. If there's a nicely integrated Qt widget that people can use to play a video or sound in their apps, which does everything they need and works kind of well, and perhaps it'd be a bit trickier to integrate the direct GStreamer equivalent, then they'll probably use the Qt abstraction. I'm guessing, but perhaps you're worried that the "easy gstreamer way" (if it exists, and I'm no multimedia expert) won't get any press or documentation, and people will be told to "just use Qt Mobility" if the question comes up - and I think that is a reasonable concern. Another reasonable concern is whether the Qt abstraction will *really* make things easier, or will simply remove control. All abstractions are leaky, I read somewhere, so perhaps it's not quite as simple as "If you just want to play a video, use Qt". http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/LeakyAbstractions.html Cheers, Dave. -- maemo.org docsmaster Email: [email protected] Jabber: [email protected] _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
