I'm not a developer, just a hopeful user waiting for a semi-stable pysoy. From my perspective I'd vote ogg2. I'd rather wait than install ogg1 now then upgrade to ogg2 later, and possibly deal with changes to pysoy down the road. I'd also like to see pysoy maintain what appears to be a general philosophy of doing more work upfront to do things right, than just do whatever it takes to get it working.
I do follow this list and read every message even though I almost never reply or post. I can say I'm pleased with what I've read. Take your time, do what you think is best for the long haul, and keep up the great work guys! -Jack On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 19:43 -0400, Arc Riley wrote: > To ogg1 or ogg2, that is the question. > > libogg1 is old, has wasteful memcopies all over it, and is chalked for > obsoletion as soon as libogg2 gets libogg1 compatability bindings written. > > libogg2 is new, very efficient, easier to implement with, but is not released > yet. The API looks similar from the surface but enough has changed to make > migration time consuming, I know from experience (I maintain py-ogg2) that > it's easier to implement in Python. > > My gut says "ogg2 even though it's more work" > > While we can include it in packaged PySoy releases it does mean that all of > us > developers will, for now, need to grab it from http://svn.xiph.org/trunk/ogg2 > > So - what say you? Is this a reasonable thing to expect from us? > _______________________________________________ > PySoy-Dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.pysoy.org/mailman/listinfo/pysoy-dev _______________________________________________ PySoy-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.pysoy.org/mailman/listinfo/pysoy-dev
