On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 08:44:01PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>> * audio production: sound synthesis, audio editing, sequencing.
>> * multimedia playing: vlc ;)
>> * video production: ... I don't do this.
>> * home multimedia center: xmbc/mediatomb style software.
>> Or should we have a finer grained split?
> I imagine something like this:
> * multimedia-gtk (enhancing e.g. gnome)
> * multimedia-qt (enhances e.g. kde)
> * multimedia-light (enhances e.g. lxde and xfce)
> * multimedia-tiny (enhances e.g. libphone-ui-shr)
I cannot make qualified comments on these, but I somehow feel that only
eduacted users care about their widget library and/or desktop
environment. For everyone else, the distinction between GTK and QT and
even light and tiny is hardly obvious.
But let's talk about the main point I want to cover:
> * multimedia-pro-audio
> * multimedia-pro-video
> * multimedia (recommending all of above)
While I could perfectly live with the first two, the latter is probably
not the best choice: users could tend to read "Multimedia? Cool, give me
all." and end up with tons of software that's completely inappropriate
for them. They'll be facing a question about jackd realtime priorities
and probably more pro stuff.
OTOH, producers might not want each and every single GTK+QT+whatever
movie player, desktop tool and the lot when installing a video editing
machine or digital audio workstation.
Long story short: don't make a catch-all choice across consumer and
Just my €0.02
mail: a...@thur.de http://adi.thur.de PGP/GPG: key via keyserver
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list