On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 09:09:12PM +0200, Adrian Knoth wrote:
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
producer variants.

Good point.

Let me try again:

 * multimedia (depends on multimedia-gtk | multimedia-playback)
 * multimedia-gnome (provides multimedia-playback; depends on
   Qt/Phonon-based and KDE apps)
 * multimedia-gtk (provides multimedia-playback; depends on
   GTK/GStreamer and GNOME apps)
 * multimedia-light (provides multimedia-playback; depends on
   apps _not_ linked against desktop-homogenizing libraries)
 * multimedia-tiny (provides multimedia-playback; depends on
   apps targeted embedded devices)
 * multimedia-pro-studio (depends on "classic" GUI style
   production tools like Ardour, JACK and Hydrogen)
 * multimedia-pro-live (depends on production tools designed
   for live mixing of audio and video)
 * multimedia-pro-devel (depends on scripting and programming
   tools like PureData and CSound)

With "depends on" I really mean "depends, recommends or suggests, weighted how we consider a nice user experience.

We can't (with current structures) serve all flavors of use equally well. but for each of the flavors we do serve well, we can suggest packages related to that flavor but deemed by us as overlapping and superfluous (which obviously means some other would favor those - else it had no point in being shipped with Debian at all!)

Also, I do dream about being able in the future to serve more fine-grained needs, and we need to start somewhere to realize how clumsy our current mechanisms really are for serving things like this: Imagine in the future being able through debconf or similar to explress "I want to "edit video", mostly "live" on relatively "low-end hardware" using strictly "GUI" interfaces.

 - Jonas

 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list

Reply via email to