Udo Richter wrote:
Being actively developed and being needed are two different things. I wouldn't
want to drop all the plugins that aren't under active development any more, as
this would probably be true for 2/3 of my plugins.
If there is really a need for that special unsupported plugin,
If there is really a need for that special unsupported plugin, then the best way
to go would be that at least one of all those distributions, who currently
maintains that plugin, republishes it somewhere (AFAIR
projects.vdr-developer.org was invented for that?).
First step could be to apply all
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Never in my wildest dreams would I have expected such an outrage about this
change, which was entirely intended to make things simpler in the future.
But if this is not what people want, then let's just stick with the old
Makefiles and declare version 1.7.34 a complete
OK. 50 plugins doesn't sound impossible to deal with. But they have to
be in one place, as Manuel mentioned.
Name these 50 unmaintained plugins and then we can check when and how
they'll be moved to vdr-developer.org.
Christopher
2012/12/29 Helmut Auer v...@helmutauer.de:
If there is really
Helmut Auer wrote:
We are talking about 100 Plugins. Maybe we can drop the half of these but 50
will be remaining ...
No problem. Let's start a discussion about this in a separate thread. I bet that
about 20 more plugins aren't worth the effort and so about 30 plugins will be
left. Porting
On 12/29/2012 01:14 PM, Helmut Auer wrote:
If there is really a need for that special unsupported plugin, then
the best way
to go would be that at least one of all those distributions, who
currently
maintains that plugin, republishes it somewhere (AFAIR
projects.vdr-developer.org was invented
On 12/29/2012 01:07 PM, Manuel Reimer wrote:
[..]
In context of a plugin, VDR should be something like a backend
library. It has to be installed, but the plugin should be compilable
from *everywhere* as long as the backend library is there.
This is why pkg-config was invented and this is how
von Manuel Reimer manuel.rei...@gmx.de
The changes in 1.7.34 are a big change into the right direction!
FullAck, but really at that time of 1.7.xx? At this time where 1.7.xx is
more less saddled by all HDTV users?
Many new festures have been postponed after V2 release. Some of them
wouldn't
On 29.12.2012 17:52, fnu wrote:
von Manuel Reimer manuel.rei...@gmx.de
The changes in 1.7.34 are a big change into the right direction!
FullAck, but really at that time of 1.7.xx? At this time where 1.7.xx is
more less saddled by all HDTV users?
Many new festures have been postponed after V2
von Klaus Schmidinger klaus.schmidin...@tvdr.de
From what I have seen in this thread lately, I don't think the outcry
would have been any less then...
You're maybe right, but I'm not sure.
Because now, everybody does know, these changes will happen soon, no Plugin
for V2.1 w/o rework.
But
As many know, getting standardized dvb signal info in linux has been a
want for a very long time for a lot of users (and developers). There
has been several talks/threads about it but nothing was ever merged.
The subject has come up once again and Mauro has posted a patch for
review. I know that
Am 28.12.2012 16:38, schrieb Klaus Schmidinger:
So should we go back to the Makefiles of version 1.7.33 and declare this
area of the program source untouchable forever?
Beside all the current whining (and *I* don't exclude myself from that),
it is nevertheless a step in the right direction.
2012/12/29 Udo Richter udo_rich...@gmx.de:
Even if there was
an thread in vdr-portal, I did miss it, and there was no word of it in
the mailing list, which I always considered to be the central spot of
development.
Really? http://linuxtv.org/pipermail/vdr/2012-November/026813.html
There was NO
OK. 50 plugins doesn't sound impossible to deal with. But they have to
be in one place, as Manuel mentioned.
Name these 50 unmaintained plugins and then we can check when and how
they'll be moved to vdr-developer.org.
there is a small list, ~30 plugins on
von Christopher Reimer c.reimer1...@gmail.com
Yes, I am happy with the new makefiles.
I'm glad to hear this, but what about all the other developers and users?
Developer version back and forth, VDR 1.7.xx has become silently a somewhat
stable version over the years, due to it's HDTV
On Saturday 29 December 2012 - 18:39:05, fnu wrote:
.. or maybe an in between stable release called V1.8 and go ahead with these
important changes in V1.9 ... just a thought ...
+1
Gero
___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
16 matches
Mail list logo
