Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-07 Thread Travel Factory S.r.l.

  Isn't that the fun part of it? I don't watch much TV, but I 
 like
  fiddling and tuning the VDR!
 
 What you said here is absolutely right, i totally agree  :)

I also agree... for my part... but my wife doesn't !! She wants to turn on the 
pc and switch to euronews... or record a film... 


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-06 Thread Füley István
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, Morfsta wrote:

 Isn't that the fun part of it? I don't watch much TV, but I like
 fiddling and tuning the VDR!

What you said here is absolutely right, i totally agree  :)

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-05 Thread Arthur Konovalov
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 On 02/03/08 12:06, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote:
 Is the CAM Handling regarding multiple parallel recodings (on the same 
 channel) fixed?
 
 Have you tried version 1.5 yet?
 
 It can do multiple parallel recordings with the same CAM (if the
 CAM supports this).

I still have problem with it.
Recording on crypted channel is not possible when watching FTA DVB-C on 
the same frequency.
Same situation works fine on vdr-1.4.x environment.


Regards,
Arthur

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-05 Thread Peter Münster
On Sun, Feb 03 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 
 Yes or No?

No, because 1.4.7 is quite good enough today for most users and
distributions, and those who need more can compile 1.5.X with additional
kernel drivers. So you don't need to bother with 2 branches (1.6 and 1.7).
Cheers, Peter

-- 
http://pmrb.free.fr/contact/


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-05 Thread Antti Hartikainen
On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 09:06:13PM +0200, Arthur Konovalov wrote:
  Have you tried version 1.5 yet?
  
  It can do multiple parallel recordings with the same CAM (if the
  CAM supports this).
 
 I still have problem with it.
 Recording on crypted channel is not possible when watching FTA DVB-C on 
 the same frequency.
 Same situation works fine on vdr-1.4.x environment.

I agree, this was main reason to go back to 1.4.x for me, because it was 
impossible to watch/record FTA channels while recording on encrypted channel.

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-04 Thread Patrick Rother
On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 11:17:05AM +0100, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 
 Yes or No?

Yes.


pgptdi5ZvSAJN.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-04 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 02/04/08 09:46, Ludwig Nussel wrote:
 Ville-Pekka Vainio wrote:
 I've been using VDR for about a year and a half now and it's great. But with 
 all due respect, I think you're doing this the wrong way around. At least 
 here in Finland, decent DVB subtitles support is pretty much the only thing 
 VDR needs to be usable out-of-the-box with the free channels we have.
 
 If ttxtsubs are that important and require patches to vdr, why don't we see
 them posted and discussed on the list?

I believe there is a patch for that, but that's not the way I want to
implement it. I want to convert the incoming teletext subtitles to
DVB subtitles, so that on the recording/display side we only need to deal with
one type of subtitles. (Besides, I guess some day teletext subtitles
will become obsolete, anyway).

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-04 Thread Ludwig Nussel
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

Yes.

It would be pity if that means that the stable version stays at
1.6.0 and doesn't receive any more bugfixes though.

cu
Ludwig

-- 
 (o_   Ludwig Nussel
 //\   
 V_/_  http://www.suse.de/
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg)



___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-04 Thread DD ---




 Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 10:06:19 +0200
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: vdr@linuxtv.org
 Subject: Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

 I usually lurk here so my vote represents the 'user' community more than
 the 'dev'..

 Yes to stable 1.6.0 with current kernel-drivers - VDR needs new users
 that can get it running easily out of the box with a debian bare bones
 install. The people who want HDTV support are going to go with the
 dev-releases anyway.

 Yes to switching to TS recording, maybe review the metadata fileformats
 a bit and allow more extendability and plugin data store there (no XML
 pretty please!)

 Yes to ttextsubs too (oh sorry you didn't ask! ;)


 - Vaizki


 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
 Of Klaus Schmidinger
 Sent: 3. helmikuuta 2008 12:17
 To: vdr@linuxtv.org
 Subject: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

 There has been some controversy about my recent decision to
 move forward and require the multiproto driver for VDR in
 the developer version. It is also currently rather unclear
 whether the current PES recording format can be kept to handle
 HDTV, or whether it would make sense (or even be feasible)
 to switch to TS (as suggested by the people from RMM).

 In order to take the edge of this, I was wondering if it would
 make sense to revoke the switch to the multiproto driver and
 go straight towards a stable version 1.6.0 with what is now in
 version 1.5.14. This should satisfy all those who are eagerly awaiting
 a new stable version, without forcing them to make the driver switch
 now.

 If we decide to go that way, I would release a version 1.5.15 with
 what could become the new stable, wait until like the end of the month
 to see whether it still needs some minor fixes, and call it 1.6.0 then.
 I know there are still some patches out there that some would expect
 to go into the next stable version, but I actually want to prepare VDR
 for HDTV before looking into these patches.

 So, here's the straw poll:

 Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
 version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

 Yes or No?

 Klaus



 ___
 vdr mailing list
 vdr@linuxtv.org
 http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr

 ___
 vdr mailing list
 vdr@linuxtv.org
 http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr

I agree, yes to stable 1.6.0 with current kernel-drivers. 

I also like to see ttxtsubs support in stable version.
_
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-04 Thread Ludwig Nussel
Ville-Pekka Vainio wrote:
 I've been using VDR for about a year and a half now and it's great. But with 
 all due respect, I think you're doing this the wrong way around. At least 
 here in Finland, decent DVB subtitles support is pretty much the only thing 
 VDR needs to be usable out-of-the-box with the free channels we have.

If ttxtsubs are that important and require patches to vdr, why don't we see
them posted and discussed on the list?

cu
Ludwig

-- 
 (o_   Ludwig Nussel
 //\   
 V_/_  http://www.suse.de/
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg)



___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-04 Thread Ludwig Nussel
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 On 02/04/08 09:46, Ludwig Nussel wrote:
  Ville-Pekka Vainio wrote:
  I've been using VDR for about a year and a half now and it's great. But 
  with 
  all due respect, I think you're doing this the wrong way around. At least 
  here in Finland, decent DVB subtitles support is pretty much the only 
  thing 
  VDR needs to be usable out-of-the-box with the free channels we have.
  
  If ttxtsubs are that important and require patches to vdr, why don't we see
  them posted and discussed on the list?
 
 I believe there is a patch for that, but that's not the way I want to
 implement it. I want to convert the incoming teletext subtitles to
 DVB subtitles, so that on the recording/display side we only need to deal with
 one type of subtitles. (Besides, I guess some day teletext subtitles
 will become obsolete, anyway).

Well, that's exactly the kind of feedback I'd expect if someone
had actually posted the patch. Anyone out there who wants to step up
now and implement it that way? :-)

cu
Ludwig

-- 
 (o_   Ludwig Nussel
 //\   
 V_/_  http://www.suse.de/
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg)




___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-04 Thread Tobi
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 I believe there is a patch for that, but that's not the way I want to
 implement it.

Yes we have this patch in the (unofficial!) Debian package to support
the ttxtsubs plug-in. The Patch is maintained by Rolf Ahrenberg.

http://www.saunalahti.fi/~rahrenbe/vdr/patches/

 I want to convert the incoming teletext subtitles to
 DVB subtitles, so that on the recording/display side we only need to deal with
 one type of subtitles.

I think this shouldn't be too hard to do. Would you accept come
contributed coded that does this? Teletext subtitles are just in general
kinda ugly, because somtetimes even the announcement of the teletext
page for the subtitles isn't correctly implemented on the provide side.
This means, you need some way to configure the teletext subtitles page
per channel.

  (Besides, I guess some day teletext subtitles
 will become obsolete, anyway).
   

I'm not sure about that. At least the ZDF here in Germany uses DVB
subtitles now, but I don't think the other broadcasters will follow very
fast.

Tobias

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-04 Thread Ed Hein
On Sunday 03 February 2008 11:17:05 Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 So, here's the straw poll:

Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

 Yes or No?

Yes.

Cya, Ed

-- 
When the stars threw down their spears,  AAh! megamisama...
And water'd heaven with their tears,
Did he smile his work to see?AntHill inside
Did he who made the Lamb make thee?  Powered by caffeine
 (William Blake)
IRC: Tyger
 TarrychkReply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-04 Thread Nicolas Huillard
Klaus Schmidinger a écrit :
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 
 Yes or No?

1) a stable release shouldn't stop the current development for a long 
time, thus shouldn't delay the S2/H264 and other neat future features,

2) a stable release is becoming kind of important (with features as they 
are in 1.4.13) for packagers and regular users, because of simple delay 
between releases,

3) developpers of this list will continue to use the next development 
suite either, so the stable release won't much impact them

This is a Yes.

-- 
NH

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-04 Thread Matthias Fechner
Hi,

Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

yes

Best regards,
Matthias

-- 

Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to
build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the universe trying to
produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the universe is winning. --
Rich Cook

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-04 Thread Matthias Schwarzott
On Sonntag, 3. Februar 2008, Andrey Kuzmin wrote:
 What are chances that multiproto will be merged to kernel in the
 nearest time (1-2 months?) If chances are big, I don't think that it
 is a good time to lose valuable Klaus's time for releasing 
 supporting new stable version that will freeze another stable 1.8 with
 multiproto support till 2009 :) So my vote is is NO in this case

As far as I know the merge window for 2.6.25 is almost closed.
So the first kernel that could contain multiproto api is 2.6.26. But I doubt 
it, as multiproto is not even merged to main development branch of the 
drivers.

Regards
Matthias

-- 
Matthias Schwarzott (zzam)

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-04 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 02/04/08 18:11, Füley István wrote:
 I'm not sure about that. At least the ZDF here in Germany uses DVB
 subtitles now, but I don't think the other broadcasters will follow very
 fast.
 I believe the ARD is also looking into this.

 At any rate, using DVB subtitles would be the optimal solution.

 Klaus
 
 
 You're absolutely right. But:
 UPC Direct removed couple of days ago the Czech and Hungarian DVB 
 subtitle from BBC Prime (on S19.2E) and now it only has teletext subtitles 
 :( This means that after about a year I have to install teletext subtitle 
 plugin again.

Did they give any reason why they did this?

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-04 Thread Füley István
 You're absolutely right. But:
 UPC Direct removed couple of days ago the Czech and Hungarian DVB
 subtitle from BBC Prime (on S19.2E) and now it only has teletext subtitles
 :( This means that after about a year I have to install teletext subtitle
 plugin again.

 Did they give any reason why they did this?

 Klaus

I'm waiting their answer from Saturday...

I guess it will be something like BBC did this or some other stupid 
answer...

(On S13E BBC Prime's DVB subtitles are working fine.)

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now? - Result!

2008-02-04 Thread Andrey Kuzmin
In any case - thanks to Klaus that community were involved in this
process. IMHO feature requests polls will also be useful. As we see
now, teletext subtitles are also important feature for many of VDR
users, may be there are others too :)



___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-04 Thread Sebastien Lucas
On Feb 3, 2008 11:17 AM, Klaus Schmidinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 So, here's the straw poll:

Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

 Yes or No?

In my opinion, Yes (a stable release never hurts).

Totally off topic and only my opinion
A side note : I think most of the No answer comes from people who were
expecting specific modifications (txtsub, full dvb subtitle, dvb-s2,
h264, ts recording, ...). IMHO answering no in that case is not very
adult and comes mainly from the frustration of not having exactly what
Santa Klaus (I know it's easy) was supposed to bring.
/Totally off topic and only my opinion

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-04 Thread VDR User
On Feb 4, 2008 12:06 AM, Jukka Vaisanen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Yes to stable 1.6.0 with current kernel-drivers - VDR needs new users
 that can get it running easily out of the box with a debian bare bones
 install. The people who want HDTV support are going to go with the
 dev-releases anyway.

I totally disagree.  Assuming the HDTV guys want to go with dev
releases is not what I've seen from the majority of one of them, it's
actually the opposite.  For a lot of people there's a stigma that
developer = unstable/crash/bugged/etc.  They feel that stable
releases are 'safer' for them.

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-04 Thread Füley István
 I'm not sure about that. At least the ZDF here in Germany uses DVB
 subtitles now, but I don't think the other broadcasters will follow very
 fast.

 I believe the ARD is also looking into this.

 At any rate, using DVB subtitles would be the optimal solution.

 Klaus


You're absolutely right. But:
UPC Direct removed couple of days ago the Czech and Hungarian DVB 
subtitle from BBC Prime (on S19.2E) and now it only has teletext subtitles 
:( This means that after about a year I have to install teletext subtitle 
plugin again.

Istvan

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-04 Thread Lauri Tischler
Ludwig Nussel wrote:
 Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 
 Yes.
 
 It would be pity if that means that the stable version stays at
 1.6.0 and doesn't receive any more bugfixes though.

Bugs ?
The VDR is the only bugfree software known.
You must not mix features and bugs.

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-04 Thread Petri Helin
On Feb 4, 2008 7:15 PM, Sebastien Lucas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 Totally off topic and only my opinion
 A side note : I think most of the No answer comes from people who were
 expecting specific modifications (txtsub, full dvb subtitle, dvb-s2,
 h264, ts recording, ...). IMHO answering no in that case is not very
 adult and comes mainly from the frustration of not having exactly what
 Santa Klaus (I know it's easy) was supposed to bring.
 /Totally off topic and only my opinion


Albeit there is a lot of truth in your comment, and I do notice some
resemplance to my lines of thinking in your claim, I would like to point out
why I chose NO (which I then changed into yes...):

Ttxtsubs support = No need to patch VDR core in countries using subtitles.
H.264 support = Possibility to use VDR in countries that are passing by
mpeg2 and going straight to h.264 instead

I know that both of those can be achieved with existing patches, but that
will require either a non-vanilla VDR in distribution repositories or
self-compiled VDR. Therefore, if marked as stable in its current state, VDR
will not yet be easier to adopt by new users. It will bring new features and
improvements for many old users, that I will not deny.

I feel like I have been too much on the negative side and fail to remember
at times that this is just a hobby of Klaus', so let me express my thanks to
Klaus for a well chosen hobby that brings joy to a lot of users :)

-Petri
___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-04 Thread Philippe Gramoullé

Hello Klaus,

On Sun, 03 Feb 2008 11:17:05 +0100
Klaus Schmidinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  | So, here's the straw poll:
  | 
  |Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
  |version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
  | 
  | Yes or No?
  | 
  | Klaus

Count me as a Yes.

Thanks,

Philippe

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Martin Binder (AON)
Hi Klaus,
my opinion: the next stable version should contain DVB-S2/H.264 (HDTV) 
support. So there is no use for a stable version based on 1.5.14.

Kind regards
Martin

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
 Of Klaus Schmidinger
 Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2008 11:17 AM
 To: vdr@linuxtv.org
 Subject: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

 There has been some controversy about my recent decision to
 move forward and require the multiproto driver for VDR in
 the developer version. It is also currently rather unclear
 whether the current PES recording format can be kept to handle
 HDTV, or whether it would make sense (or even be feasible)
 to switch to TS (as suggested by the people from RMM).

 In order to take the edge of this, I was wondering if it would
 make sense to revoke the switch to the multiproto driver and
 go straight towards a stable version 1.6.0 with what is now in
 version 1.5.14. This should satisfy all those who are eagerly awaiting
 a new stable version, without forcing them to make the driver switch
 now.

 If we decide to go that way, I would release a version 1.5.15 with
 what could become the new stable, wait until like the end of the month
 to see whether it still needs some minor fixes, and call it 1.6.0 then.
 I know there are still some patches out there that some would expect
 to go into the next stable version, but I actually want to prepare VDR
 for HDTV before looking into these patches.

 So, here's the straw poll:

Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

 Yes or No?

 Klaus



 ___
 vdr mailing list
 vdr@linuxtv.org
 http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr



___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Magnus Hörlin
Martin Binder (AON) wrote:
 Hi Klaus,
 my opinion: the next stable version should contain DVB-S2/H.264 (HDTV) 
 support. So there is no use for a stable version based on 1.5.14.

 Kind regards
 Martin

   
Basically, I agree. But since there are no DVB-S2 drivers in the 
official kernel I think Klaus is right in making a 1.6 now before 
jumping on the multiproto bandwagon. DVB-S2 and h.264 will be quite 
experimental for a while so why not leave that for 1.7.
In short, I vote yes. And I'm really glad you have committed to 
implementing DVB-S2/h.264 in VDR!
/Magnus H


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Rolf Ahrenberg
On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:

   Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
   version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

No. The current features in 1.5.14 are still missing some essential key 
features that should be included in the next stable version: DVB 
subtitling (still missing component type support for the hard of 
hearing), EBU subtitling, native channels.conf support for pseudo DVB 
devices (pvrinput, iptv, analogtv), and multiple channel lists.

BR,
--
rofa

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Dave P
On Sunday 03 Feb 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:

Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

I have no use for HDTV support (the only HDTV available in the UK at 
present is on the closed $KY system), so freezing the current development 
version into a stable release sounds a good idea.

The distributions which include vdr would probably appreciate a release 
which worked with their existing kernels.

Maybe we'll all meet again at version 2.0...

 Yes or No?

Yes.
-- 
Dave

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 02/03/08 11:43, Rolf Ahrenberg wrote:
 On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 
   Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
   version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 
 No. The current features in 1.5.14 are still missing some essential key 
 features that should be included in the next stable version: DVB 
 subtitling (still missing component type support for the hard of 
 hearing), EBU subtitling, native channels.conf support for pseudo DVB 
 devices (pvrinput, iptv, analogtv), and multiple channel lists.

I am not going to deal with these things before DVB-S2/H.264, anyway.

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Matthias Schniedermeyer
On 03.02.2008 11:17, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 
 So, here's the straw poll:
 
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

Is the CAM Handling regarding multiple parallel recodings (on the same 
channel) fixed?

I had to revert to 1.2 after the 1.4 was such a disaster in that regard.

If yes then: yes.
If no then: I don't care. Can't use it anyway.




Bis denn

-- 
Real Programmers consider what you see is what you get to be just as 
bad a concept in Text Editors as it is in women. No, the Real Programmer
wants a you asked for it, you got it text editor -- complicated, 
cryptic, powerful, unforgiving, dangerous.


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Clemens Kirchgatterer
Klaus Schmidinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 So, here's the straw poll:
 
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

1.5 already introduced many new features as freetype, the new i18n,
subtitles, ... just to name some. h264 has not seen that broad of an
adoption to be a must have for the next stable release either. and the
switch to the new kernel API will make things even more troublesome
for packagers who want to ship the latest stable vdr release. IMHO 

 Yes or No?

yes.

c.k.

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 02/03/08 12:11, Richard F wrote:
 Klaus,
 
 For those of us not 100% up to date with the code, could you list for us
 the main changes we are voting for here?
 Also, some indication of any known compatibility issues that might arise
 (e.g. with Vdradmin, Vomp, Epgsearch...

Please take a look at the HISTORY file that comes with VDR.

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 02/03/08 12:06, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote:
 On 03.02.2008 11:17, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 So, here's the straw poll:

Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 
 Is the CAM Handling regarding multiple parallel recodings (on the same 
 channel) fixed?

Have you tried version 1.5 yet?

It can do multiple parallel recordings with the same CAM (if the
CAM supports this).

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Rolf Ahrenberg
On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:

 On 02/03/08 11:43, Rolf Ahrenberg wrote:
 No. The current features in 1.5.14 are still missing some essential key
 features that should be included in the next stable version: DVB
 subtitling (still missing component type support for the hard of
 hearing), EBU subtitling, native channels.conf support for pseudo DVB
 devices (pvrinput, iptv, analogtv), and multiple channel lists.

 I am not going to deal with these things before DVB-S2/H.264, anyway.

The compile time selection between multiproto and normal drivers (as 
done in Udo's dvb-api-emulate patch) could be used from now on. I don't 
see any reason to freeze the development at this phase.

The completition of H.264 support would be nice to have in next stable 
version.  The H.264 support isn't related only to DVB-S2 as it's used 
already in many DVB-C and DVB-T networks nowadays.

Also, I'd vote for making the recording format selectable, PES or TS, as 
it would make the postprocessing of VDR files with existing 
Windows/Linux tools a lot easier.

--
rofa

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 02/03/08 12:17, Rolf Ahrenberg wrote:
 On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 
 On 02/03/08 11:43, Rolf Ahrenberg wrote:
 No. The current features in 1.5.14 are still missing some essential key
 features that should be included in the next stable version: DVB
 subtitling (still missing component type support for the hard of
 hearing), EBU subtitling, native channels.conf support for pseudo DVB
 devices (pvrinput, iptv, analogtv), and multiple channel lists.
 I am not going to deal with these things before DVB-S2/H.264, anyway.
 
 The compile time selection between multiproto and normal drivers (as 
 done in Udo's dvb-api-emulate patch) could be used from now on. I don't 
 see any reason to freeze the development at this phase.
 
 The completition of H.264 support would be nice to have in next stable 
 version.  The H.264 support isn't related only to DVB-S2 as it's used 
 already in many DVB-C and DVB-T networks nowadays.

Just for the record: this would most likely pospone the next stable version for 
quite
a while.

 Also, I'd vote for making the recording format selectable, PES or TS, as 
 it would make the postprocessing of VDR files with existing 
 Windows/Linux tools a lot easier.

It is either going to remain PES, or switch entirely to TS.
Supporting both formats for recording is not what I intend to do.
Of course, replaying PES recordings will still be possible.

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Ville-Pekka Vainio
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 On 02/03/08 11:43, Rolf Ahrenberg wrote:
  No. The current features in 1.5.14 are still missing some essential key
  features that should be included in the next stable version: DVB
  subtitling (still missing component type support for the hard of
  hearing), EBU subtitling, native channels.conf support for pseudo DVB
  devices (pvrinput, iptv, analogtv), and multiple channel lists.

 I am not going to deal with these things before DVB-S2/H.264, anyway.

 Klaus

I've been using VDR for about a year and a half now and it's great. But with 
all due respect, I think you're doing this the wrong way around. At least 
here in Finland, decent DVB subtitles support is pretty much the only thing 
VDR needs to be usable out-of-the-box with the free channels we have.

In my opinion DVB-S2/H.264 are nice to have extra features, but working DVB 
subtitling support is a must have feature for PVR software like VDR, 
because almost everyone needs DVB subtitles around here, but not that many 
watch HDTV channels yet.

-- 
Ville-Pekka Vainio

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Richard F

Klaus,

For those of us not 100% up to date with the code, could you list for us 
the main changes we are voting for here?
Also, some indication of any known compatibility issues that might arise 
(e.g. with Vdradmin, Vomp, Epgsearch...


Thanks

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 02/03/08 12:27, Ville-Pekka Vainio wrote:
 Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 On 02/03/08 11:43, Rolf Ahrenberg wrote:
 No. The current features in 1.5.14 are still missing some essential key
 features that should be included in the next stable version: DVB
 subtitling (still missing component type support for the hard of
 hearing), EBU subtitling, native channels.conf support for pseudo DVB
 devices (pvrinput, iptv, analogtv), and multiple channel lists.
 I am not going to deal with these things before DVB-S2/H.264, anyway.

 Klaus
 
 I've been using VDR for about a year and a half now and it's great. But with 
 all due respect, I think you're doing this the wrong way around. At least 
 here in Finland, decent DVB subtitles support is pretty much the only thing 
 VDR needs to be usable out-of-the-box with the free channels we have.
 
 In my opinion DVB-S2/H.264 are nice to have extra features, but working DVB 
 subtitling support is a must have feature for PVR software like VDR, 
 because almost everyone needs DVB subtitles around here, but not that many 
 watch HDTV channels yet.

Which version of VDR are you using?

The current developer version does have DVB subtitling support.

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Ville Skyttä
On Sunday 03 February 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:

Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

+1

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Ville-Pekka Vainio
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 On 02/03/08 12:27, Ville-Pekka Vainio wrote:
  Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
  On 02/03/08 11:43, Rolf Ahrenberg wrote:
  No. The current features in 1.5.14 are still missing some essential key
  features that should be included in the next stable version: DVB
  subtitling (still missing component type support for the hard of
  hearing), EBU subtitling, native channels.conf support for pseudo DVB
  devices (pvrinput, iptv, analogtv), and multiple channel lists.
 
  I am not going to deal with these things before DVB-S2/H.264, anyway.
 
  Klaus
 
  I've been using VDR for about a year and a half now and it's great. But
  with all due respect, I think you're doing this the wrong way around. At
  least here in Finland, decent DVB subtitles support is pretty much the
  only thing VDR needs to be usable out-of-the-box with the free channels
  we have.
 
  In my opinion DVB-S2/H.264 are nice to have extra features, but working
  DVB subtitling support is a must have feature for PVR software like
  VDR, because almost everyone needs DVB subtitles around here, but not
  that many watch HDTV channels yet.

 Which version of VDR are you using?

 The current developer version does have DVB subtitling support.

 Klaus

I have to admit I'm still using 1.4.7 with the subtitles plugin. But I was 
referring to the issues with DVB and EBU subtitling that Rolf pointed out in 
his mail. If there are problems and/or missing features, I wish those could 
be fixed before doing a stable release. I'll test 1.5 soon myself, so I'll 
see what the situation actually is.

-- 
Ville-Pekka Vainio

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Petri Helin
Ville-Pekka Vainio wrote:
 In my opinion DVB-S2/H.264 are nice to have extra features, but working DVB 
 subtitling support is a must have feature for PVR software like VDR, 
 because almost everyone needs DVB subtitles around here, but not that many 
 watch HDTV channels yet.
 

But the DVB subtitling is working, isn't it? At least i have not had any 
problems with the incorporated solution for a long time. But I still 
feel that the subtitling as such is not ready, because the functionality 
of ttxtsubs plugin is not yet in the core. Most of the subscription 
channels that I have/have had use only ttxtsubs (e.g. Canal+) and 
therefore I am forced to still patch the core VDR to get ttxtsubs 
working. In an ideal state no patches would be required :)

On the other hand.. h.264 is AFAIK coming popular with SDTV in DVB-T 
also (Estonia, Norway, Slovenia) and therefore I feel that it should be 
prioritized over any new subtitling solutions and once there is support 
for h.264, a new stable release should be made.

-Petri

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Matthias Schniedermeyer
On 03.02.2008 12:17, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 On 02/03/08 12:06, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote:
  On 03.02.2008 11:17, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
  So, here's the straw poll:
 
 Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
 version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
  
  Is the CAM Handling regarding multiple parallel recodings (on the same 
  channel) fixed?
 
 Have you tried version 1.5 yet?

No

And as the 1.2-version works great i have no real pressure for anything 
newer. (*)

The only exception is channel-scanning, but for that i have a 
1.4-version in a parallel-setup, that i can run for a bit of time when 
there are no recordings pending.

I will try a 1.6-version after a little time has passed, but it heavily 
depends on me having to update the Linux-install to a recent state or 
not.

 It can do multiple parallel recordings with the same CAM (if the
 CAM supports this).

That's not a case i'm very much interested in, at least as long as i 
don't know it is actually usable in my case. But even then, Murphy will 
prevent it from being useful 90% of the time it could have been useful. 
So it's still nothing i would count on.





*:
Taking aside that i can't update my DVB-computers linux-installation to 
anything recent as the 1.2-version of VDR can't cope with a recent glibc 
(threading). But that's not a real problem as i don't use my 
DVB-computers for anything else. :-)


Bis denn

-- 
Real Programmers consider what you see is what you get to be just as 
bad a concept in Text Editors as it is in women. No, the Real Programmer
wants a you asked for it, you got it text editor -- complicated, 
cryptic, powerful, unforgiving, dangerous.


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 02/03/08 12:48, Petri Helin wrote:
 Ville-Pekka Vainio wrote:
 In my opinion DVB-S2/H.264 are nice to have extra features, but working 
 DVB 
 subtitling support is a must have feature for PVR software like VDR, 
 because almost everyone needs DVB subtitles around here, but not that many 
 watch HDTV channels yet.

 
 But the DVB subtitling is working, isn't it? At least i have not had any 
 problems with the incorporated solution for a long time. But I still 
 feel that the subtitling as such is not ready, because the functionality 
 of ttxtsubs plugin is not yet in the core. Most of the subscription 
 channels that I have/have had use only ttxtsubs (e.g. Canal+) and 
 therefore I am forced to still patch the core VDR to get ttxtsubs 
 working. In an ideal state no patches would be required :)
 
 On the other hand.. h.264 is AFAIK coming popular with SDTV in DVB-T 
 also (Estonia, Norway, Slovenia) and therefore I feel that it should be 
 prioritized over any new subtitling solutions and once there is support 
 for h.264, a new stable release should be made.

Is this a Yes or No vote?

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Petri Helin
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 On 02/03/08 12:48, Petri Helin wrote:
 once there is support 
 for h.264, a new stable release should be made.
 
 Is this a Yes or No vote?
 
 Klaus
 


Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 
 Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
 version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 
  Yes or No?

If the h.264 support is left out, it's a no.

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Füley István
On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:

   Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
   version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

Yes, I think it would be a good idea to have a stable and up-to-date VDR 
version in the 
main distros based on the kernel drivers.

OT: Klaus, can you tell us anything about future H.264 support? 
DVB-S2  H.264 sounds HDTV, and this means that we'll have an X-based 
output instead of FF-card's TV out?

Istvan

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 02/03/08 12:48, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote:
 On 03.02.2008 12:17, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 On 02/03/08 12:06, Matthias Schniedermeyer wrote:
 On 03.02.2008 11:17, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 So, here's the straw poll:

Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 Is the CAM Handling regarding multiple parallel recodings (on the same 
 channel) fixed?
 Have you tried version 1.5 yet?
 
 No
 
 And as the 1.2-version works great i have no real pressure for anything 
 newer. (*)
 
 The only exception is channel-scanning, but for that i have a 
 1.4-version in a parallel-setup, that i can run for a bit of time when 
 there are no recordings pending.
 
 I will try a 1.6-version after a little time has passed, but it heavily 
 depends on me having to update the Linux-install to a recent state or 
 not.
 
 It can do multiple parallel recordings with the same CAM (if the
 CAM supports this).
 
 That's not a case i'm very much interested in, at least as long as i 
 don't know it is actually usable in my case. But even then, Murphy will 
 prevent it from being useful 90% of the time it could have been useful. 
 So it's still nothing i would count on.

Sorry, I must have read your text too fast.

AFAICS doing several overlapping recordings on the same encrypted
channel should work without problems.

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Rolf Ahrenberg
On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Petri Helin wrote:

 But the DVB subtitling is working, isn't it? At least i have not had any

Only partially. The current implementation doesn't differentiate normal 
and hard of hearing stream components (Table 26 in ETSI EN 300 468). 
I was going to make a patch for this, but the ttxtsubs support would 
require modification to the same piece of code and Klaus propably want 
to design the solution by himself.

 working. In an ideal state no patches would be required :)

I agree. No plugins should require any patches.

BR,
--
rofa

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Rene Hertell
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 So, here's the straw poll:
 
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?


I would vote for a stable release now, cause some time has passed since 
the latest stable was released. Some ppl might get the impression that 
VDR is dead, cause they don't dare to use the dev-version. The latest 
stable (1.4.7) was released in may 2007..

I think that the current version could be good to freeze now, and then 
continue with new stuff.

René

-=-=-
... Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing 
section in a swimming pool.

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Patrick Boettcher
Hi Klaus,

On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

With H264 support, because some DVB-T channels (at least here in France) 
are starting to carry H264-channels, afaiu unencrypted.

With Multiproto support (DVB-S2), but only if VDR is able to switch to the 
current DVB-API provided by standard kernels at compile time. I guess 
Multiproto will not be there before 2.6.26 or even later. There is a bunch 
of drivers currently not working with Multiproto.

Thanks,
Patrick

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Mikko Salo
Rolf Ahrenberg wrote:
 On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:

   
   Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
   version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 

 No. The current features in 1.5.14 are still missing some essential key 
 features that should be included in the next stable version: DVB 
 subtitling (still missing component type support for the hard of 
 hearing), EBU subtitling, native channels.conf support for pseudo DVB 
 devices (pvrinput, iptv, analogtv), and multiple channel lists.

   
For the same reasons, it's a No from me.
If EBU subtitles are implemented in the vdr core without any need of 
plugins or patches, it's a Yes.

-Mikko


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Patrick Boettcher
On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:

 On 02/03/08 13:26, Patrick Boettcher wrote:
  Hi Klaus,
  
  On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
 version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
  
  With H264 support, because some DVB-T channels (at least here in France) 
  are starting to carry H264-channels, afaiu unencrypted.
  
  With Multiproto support (DVB-S2), but only if VDR is able to switch to the 
  current DVB-API provided by standard kernels at compile time. I guess 
  Multiproto will not be there before 2.6.26 or even later. There is a bunch 
  of drivers currently not working with Multiproto.
 
 There can only be Yes or No answers ;-)

There can be only yes or no to a yes-or-no question. The latter criteria 
does not apply for yours. 

Maybe shorter: yes, without DVB-S2 support, with H264.

Patrick.

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Anssi Hannula
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 There has been some controversy about my recent decision to
 move forward and require the multiproto driver for VDR in
 the developer version. It is also currently rather unclear
 whether the current PES recording format can be kept to handle
 HDTV, or whether it would make sense (or even be feasible)
 to switch to TS (as suggested by the people from RMM).

I favor TS due to the greater support by other applications.

[...]
 So, here's the straw poll:
 
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 
 Yes or No?

No, mostly due to the missing teletext subtitling support.

-- 
Anssi Hannula

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 02/03/08 12:40, Füley István wrote:
 ...
 OT: Klaus, can you tell us anything about future H.264 support? 
 DVB-S2  H.264 sounds HDTV, and this means that we'll have an X-based 
 output instead of FF-card's TV out?

VDR will use whatever output device it finds.
For H.264 it will have to be one that can handle this format.
Whether this is a hardware or software device is none of VDR's
concern. The current FF-DVB cards can't handle H.264.

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Gregoire Favre
Hello,

in the Linux world, the first stable aren't necessary really stable, it
just mean feature freeze.

From my point of view, the inclusion of DVB-S2 and H.264 together with
multiproto is a must have before a feature freeze. I feel we are really
near of that point, I wish 1.6 could include those.

Off course, only Klaus could tell how near we are...

Maybe subtitles (as long as they could be disabled as I don't have to
see them...) ?

That way multiproto would come really quickly into the kernel and we'll
have a DVB-S2/H.264's VDR really out of the box :-)
-- 
Grégoire FAVRE  http://gregoire.favre.googlepages.com  http://www.gnupg.org
   http://picasaweb.google.com/Gregoire.Favre

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Jere Malila
At this point no, but yes when dvb-support is completed.

-J-

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 02/03/08 13:26, Patrick Boettcher wrote:
 Hi Klaus,
 
 On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 
 With H264 support, because some DVB-T channels (at least here in France) 
 are starting to carry H264-channels, afaiu unencrypted.
 
 With Multiproto support (DVB-S2), but only if VDR is able to switch to the 
 current DVB-API provided by standard kernels at compile time. I guess 
 Multiproto will not be there before 2.6.26 or even later. There is a bunch 
 of drivers currently not working with Multiproto.

There can only be Yes or No answers ;-)

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 02/03/08 13:39, Patrick Boettcher wrote:
 On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 
 On 02/03/08 13:26, Patrick Boettcher wrote:
 Hi Klaus,

 On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 With H264 support, because some DVB-T channels (at least here in France) 
 are starting to carry H264-channels, afaiu unencrypted.

 With Multiproto support (DVB-S2), but only if VDR is able to switch to the 
 current DVB-API provided by standard kernels at compile time. I guess 
 Multiproto will not be there before 2.6.26 or even later. There is a bunch 
 of drivers currently not working with Multiproto.
 There can only be Yes or No answers ;-)
 
 There can be only yes or no to a yes-or-no question. The latter criteria 
 does not apply for yours. 
 
 Maybe shorter: yes, without DVB-S2 support, with H264.

Well, basically the question was Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now,
based on what's in version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2. Maybe I shouldn't have
added the or even H.264 support part.

That said, I count your vote as a No.

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Ales Jurik
On Sunday 03 February 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 So, here's the straw poll:

Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

 Yes or No?

 Klaus


Hi Klaus,
I vote for DVB-S2/H.264 (HDTV) support. But if it is a problem with some 
distros could it be there time-compile switch to choose which drivers to use?

I thing it would be disadvantage to leave at whole such a well prepared part 
of vdr.

Kind regards

Ales

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 02/03/08 14:08, Udo Richter wrote:
 Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 
 My answer is a clear and determined 'Maybe'. ;)
 
 
 A new stable release would bring lots of useful features to the end user 
 that is still sitting on 1.4.7, so this is surely worth a thought, maybe 
 with a few smaller additions from the todo list. (Not that the 
 'developer' builds are anywhere near to being 'unstable'.)
 
 However, with some working fallback for multiproto compatibility, I 
 don't see a reason why multiproto support should be dropped from a new 
 stable release. Depending on how much needs to change for full h264 
 support, it might be better to spare that for the 1.7 cycle, but 
 optional multiproto API support should be possible for an 1.6 stable.
 
 So my vote is: Yes, but based on the full 1.5.14 including multiproto 
 and some fallback concept.

So according to the original question your vote counts as No then.

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 02/03/08 13:36, Ales Jurik wrote:
 On Sunday 03 February 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 So, here's the straw poll:

Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

 Yes or No?

 Klaus

 
 Hi Klaus,
 I vote for DVB-S2/H.264 (HDTV) support. But if it is a problem with some 
 distros could it be there time-compile switch to choose which drivers to use?

The developer version will only support one driver API officially,
and that's the multiproto API.

 I thing it would be disadvantage to leave at whole such a well prepared part 
 of vdr.

It wouldn't be left out of the developer version (which would then be
numbered 1.7.x).

The question was whether there is enough demand for a stable version
*now*, based on what is in version 1.5.14, but without the switch
to DVB-S2 (and thus the multiproto driver).


So far there have been 19 votes here on the list, 11 No and 8 Yes.

I have asked the same question over on vdrportal.de, and there the
situation looks a lot different: 90 votes, 70 Yes, 20 No.

For the final result all votes given here on the ML and on vdrportal.de
will be added up.

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 02/03/08 13:43, Gregoire Favre wrote:
 Hello,
 
 in the Linux world, the first stable aren't necessary really stable, it
 just mean feature freeze.
 
From my point of view, the inclusion of DVB-S2 and H.264 together with
 multiproto is a must have before a feature freeze. I feel we are really
 near of that point, I wish 1.6 could include those.

There is still a long way to go before H.264 support is in there.
The question whether PES or TS will be the future recording format
is still open.

 Off course, only Klaus could tell how near we are...
 
 Maybe subtitles (as long as they could be disabled as I don't have to
 see them...) ?
 
 That way multiproto would come really quickly into the kernel and we'll
 have a DVB-S2/H.264's VDR really out of the box :-)

So I assume your vote is No.

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Udo Richter
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

My answer is a clear and determined 'Maybe'. ;)


A new stable release would bring lots of useful features to the end user 
that is still sitting on 1.4.7, so this is surely worth a thought, maybe 
with a few smaller additions from the todo list. (Not that the 
'developer' builds are anywhere near to being 'unstable'.)

However, with some working fallback for multiproto compatibility, I 
don't see a reason why multiproto support should be dropped from a new 
stable release. Depending on how much needs to change for full h264 
support, it might be better to spare that for the 1.7 cycle, but 
optional multiproto API support should be possible for an 1.6 stable.

So my vote is: Yes, but based on the full 1.5.14 including multiproto 
and some fallback concept.

Cheers,

Udo

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Halim Sahin
Hi,

I am against a stable version at this time.
Those who wants to use latest vdr can use Udo's wrapper patch (Thanks
for this)?
The distributors can use this patch too so it is no need for a stable
version at this time!

Best regards,
Halim


-- 
Halim Sahin
E-Mail: 
halim.sahin (at) t-online.de

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Alfred Zastrow
Klaus Schmidinger schrieb:

Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 
 Yes or No?

Yes, please

best regards
Alfred


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Morfsta
No! Let's not lose momentum on VDR moving forward. I am intrigued as
to whether this move towards TS will improve performance for my H264
channels.

BTW, vompserver (CVS) / epgsearch etc all work with latest VDR and
multiproto. I use it here.

On Feb 3, 2008 1:25 PM, Klaus Schmidinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On 02/03/08 13:36, Ales Jurik wrote:
  On Sunday 03 February 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
  So, here's the straw poll:
 
 Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
 version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 
  Yes or No?
 
  Klaus
 
 
  Hi Klaus,
  I vote for DVB-S2/H.264 (HDTV) support. But if it is a problem with some
  distros could it be there time-compile switch to choose which drivers to 
  use?

 The developer version will only support one driver API officially,
 and that's the multiproto API.

  I thing it would be disadvantage to leave at whole such a well prepared part
  of vdr.

 It wouldn't be left out of the developer version (which would then be
 numbered 1.7.x).

 The question was whether there is enough demand for a stable version
 *now*, based on what is in version 1.5.14, but without the switch
 to DVB-S2 (and thus the multiproto driver).


 So far there have been 19 votes here on the list, 11 No and 8 Yes.

 I have asked the same question over on vdrportal.de, and there the
 situation looks a lot different: 90 votes, 70 Yes, 20 No.

 For the final result all votes given here on the ML and on vdrportal.de
 will be added up.

 Klaus


 ___
 vdr mailing list
 vdr@linuxtv.org
 http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Andrew Herron
Yes

On Feb 3, 2008 10:17 AM, Klaus Schmidinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

 There has been some controversy about my recent decision to
 move forward and require the multiproto driver for VDR in
 the developer version. It is also currently rather unclear
 whether the current PES recording format can be kept to handle
 HDTV, or whether it would make sense (or even be feasible)
 to switch to TS (as suggested by the people from RMM).

 In order to take the edge of this, I was wondering if it would
 make sense to revoke the switch to the multiproto driver and
 go straight towards a stable version 1.6.0 with what is now in
 version 1.5.14. This should satisfy all those who are eagerly awaiting
 a new stable version, without forcing them to make the driver switch
 now.

 If we decide to go that way, I would release a version 1.5.15 with
 what could become the new stable, wait until like the end of the month
 to see whether it still needs some minor fixes, and call it 1.6.0 then.
 I know there are still some patches out there that some would expect
 to go into the next stable version, but I actually want to prepare VDR
 for HDTV before looking into these patches.

 So, here's the straw poll:

   Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
   version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

 Yes or No?

 Klaus



 ___
 vdr mailing list
 vdr@linuxtv.org
 http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Füley István
 For the final result all votes given here on the ML and on vdrportal.de
 will be added up.

 Klaus

Shall it definitely be 1.6.0?
Can't the 1.5.x improvements (subtitle support, utf, etc) be backported to 
1.4 branch and call it 1.4.8?


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 02/03/08 14:18, Füley István wrote:
 For the final result all votes given here on the ML and on vdrportal.de
 will be added up.

 Klaus
 
 Shall it definitely be 1.6.0?
 Can't the 1.5.x improvements (subtitle support, utf, etc) be backported to 
 1.4 branch and call it 1.4.8?

Apart from a lot of work and a mere play with numbers, I don't see
any advantage in that.

1.4 is *stable*, so there can't be any interface changes - which there
are quite a few of in the 1.5.x line.

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Hannu Tirkkonen
On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 11:17:05AM +0100, Klaus Schmidinger wrote: 
 So, here's the straw poll:
 
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 
 Yes or No?
NO 

You would just shoot yourself in the leg ;O I'm sure, that there would be too 
much problems with the new features of the 1.5 branch and the mailing list 
would be full of guestions ;O That would perhaps have an influence of 
developing the H.264/HDTV brach.

What I really would like to see is 1.5.x with built-in support for (in this 
order):
H.264
ttxtsubs
TS recording
DVB-S2

Even though the new stable would be released, I would not change my main VDR 
for that. The 1.4.4 just works perfectly ;) main = for wife and kids ;)

br

...hanu


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Carsten Koch
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
...
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 
 Yes or No?

My (selfish) vote is No.

I do like the fact that 1.5.14 raises some expectation
of DVB-S2 support in the (official or distribution's) kernel.
So, for me only a DVB-S2 capable VDR 1.6.0 makes any sense.
Therefore, I vote NO to a 1.6.0 without DVB-S2.

Carsten.

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Jon Burgess

On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 11:17 +0100, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 
 Yes or No?
 
Yes.

The linux kernel development has been through similar arguments about
the merits of the 2.2/2.4/2.6 development models. I can not see any
negatives in releasing a new stable version. 

Those that require  DVB-S2/H.264 can carry on using the development
tree. Those that want the other new features from 1.5 can use the new
stable release without getting dragged into requiring a non-distro
kernel and frequent updates.

Jon



___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Christoph Haubrich

 So, here's the straw poll:

Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

 Yes or No?
   
I would prefer some other features like ttxtsub before DVB-S2 and H.264 
support but as this is not an option I vote for:

Yes, now!
The driver issue is a perfect situation to make a cut in version 
numbering and release a stable version. (And there will be enough 
questions about UTF-8 support/configuration problems. I do not want to 
imagine what will happen to the mailings list and vdr-portal if a 
version is released with so many things changed in one step like UTF-8, 
multiproto drivers and maybe other coming huge modifications. Let's take 
it step by step)

Christoph

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Wolfgang Rohdewald
On Sonntag, 3. Februar 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
   Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
    version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

yes 

-- 
Wolfgang

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Ernst Herzberg
On Sonntag, 3. Februar 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

 Yes or No?


Yes.
I need UTF-8 support _and_ a stable vdr;-)

earny/

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Andy Carter
On Sunday 03 February 2008 10:17:05 Klaus Schmidinger wrote:

Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

Yes

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Mattia Rossi
On Sun, 03 Feb 2008 11:17:05 +0100
Klaus Schmidinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 So, here's the straw poll:
 
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 
 Yes or No?
 

Yes.

The HDTV stuff and possibly a new recording format will be a huge
change, I think freezing whatever improvements have gone into 1.5.x is
a Good Thing.

Yes, there will be some stuff missing but, like when we have to buy a
new PC, in theory there's always something with a better price to
performance ratio coming in a few months ... we just don;t care and buy
whatever is better now, or keep waiting forever ..

Mattia

-- 
---MR.-

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Andrey Kuzmin
What are chances that multiproto will be merged to kernel in the
nearest time (1-2 months?) If chances are big, I don't think that it
is a good time to lose valuable Klaus's time for releasing 
supporting new stable version that will freeze another stable 1.8 with 
multiproto
support till 2009 :) So my vote is is NO in this case



___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread derblubber
Am 03.02.2008 um 11:17 schrieb Klaus Schmidinger:

 So, here's the straw poll:

   Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
   version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

 Yes or No?

 Klaus

yes

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread VDR User
On Feb 3, 2008 3:17 AM, Rolf Ahrenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 The compile time selection between multiproto and normal drivers (as
 done in Udo's dvb-api-emulate patch) could be used from now on. I don't
 see any reason to freeze the development at this phase.

 The completition of H.264 support would be nice to have in next stable
 version.  The H.264 support isn't related only to DVB-S2 as it's used
 already in many DVB-C and DVB-T networks nowadays.

 Also, I'd vote for making the recording format selectable, PES or TS, as
 it would make the postprocessing of VDR files with existing
 Windows/Linux tools a lot easier.

I tend to agree with this.  I don't think there should be any rush to
release another stable version.  I personally would love to see full
DVB-S2 and H264 support in the next stable.  The switch to multiproto
makes sense as well since it should be adopted into the next kernel by
the next release or two (leaving time to finish up VDR).  Even the
kernel maintainer wants multiproto in, and DVB-S2 users certainly do.
I don't think theres any harm is having package maintainers wait a
little longer.  If people are dying that bad to use things like
subtitles then there's nothing stopping them from using 1.5.14 for
example.

I am also in strong favor of using TS for the recording format as I've
heard countless complaints by countless numbers of users who have
trouble working with the current PES format.  The ability to easily
manipulate vdr recordings in other software has been a long-standing
desire of many many people.

Overall I'm not in favor of freezing the current development tree.
There seems to be good momentum and no solid reasons to interrupt
that.  I don't think it's a horrible thing that package maintainers
would have to wait a while longer, they've certainly waited longer in
the past..  Especially if it means the next stable release has all
kinds of new goodies wrapped inside!

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Carsten Koch
Andrey Kuzmin wrote:
...
 I don't think that it
 is a good time to lose valuable Klaus's time for releasing 
 supporting new stable version 

Absolutely right!
A 1.6.0 release now will only slow down progress.

Carsten.

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Rainer Marks
Am Sonntag, 3. Februar 2008 11:17:05 schrieb Klaus Schmidinger:

 Yes or No?
YES





signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Gregoire Favre
On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 02:24:03PM +, Jon Burgess wrote:

 The linux kernel development has been through similar arguments about
 the merits of the 2.2/2.4/2.6 development models. I can not see any
 negatives in releasing a new stable version. 

It's hard to compare VDR to kernels : VDR is maitained exclusively by
Klaus, so If there is a stable release, he would have to spent lots of
time in the stable branch before coming to the new devel branch again.

If you look at the VDR code quality, and stability of the compiled code,
I would say, we already have a stable branch in respect to usability :-)

 Those that require  DVB-S2/H.264 can carry on using the development
 tree. Those that want the other new features from 1.5 can use the new
 stable release without getting dragged into requiring a non-distro
 kernel and frequent updates.

No, I doubt there will be two branches at the same time...
-- 
Grégoire FAVRE  http://gregoire.favre.googlepages.com  http://www.gnupg.org
   http://picasaweb.google.com/Gregoire.Favre

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Klaus Schmidinger
On 02/03/08 17:43, Gregoire Favre wrote:
 On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 02:24:03PM +, Jon Burgess wrote:
 
 The linux kernel development has been through similar arguments about
 the merits of the 2.2/2.4/2.6 development models. I can not see any
 negatives in releasing a new stable version. 
 
 It's hard to compare VDR to kernels : VDR is maitained exclusively by
 Klaus, so If there is a stable release, he would have to spent lots of
 time in the stable branch before coming to the new devel branch again.
 
 If you look at the VDR code quality, and stability of the compiled code,
 I would say, we already have a stable branch in respect to usability :-)

Well, then documenting that by calling it 1.6.0 now can't be that wrong ;-).

 Those that require  DVB-S2/H.264 can carry on using the development
 tree. Those that want the other new features from 1.5 can use the new
 stable release without getting dragged into requiring a non-distro
 kernel and frequent updates.
 
 No, I doubt there will be two branches at the same time...

Once a 1.6.0 is out, there will only be bugfixes in it.
No more changes to interfaces, functionality etc.

Development will immediately resume with version 1.7.0.
And there doesn't necessarily need to be a stable 1.8.0 - the next
stable that includes DVB-S2 and H.264 could get the magical version
number 2.0.0 ;-).

Klaus

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Pasi Juppo
My vote is No.

Reason: teletext subtitles are missing and DVB-subtitles are not fully 
supported. Because of these VDR core needs to be patched therefore I 
consider it as incomplete regarding subtitling. If stable version is 
created now there is high risk that subtitling support will remain 
incomplete for a very long time.

VDR without patches would be ideal and after those mentioned parts it's 
pretty close.

Br, Pasi

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Stefan Taferner
Am Sonntag, 3. Februar 2008 11:17:05 schrieb Klaus Schmidinger:
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?


Yes.

I am also keen on having HDTV support in VDR. But as things are
now it will probably take some months to get everything done right.

Better get the pressure from a new release by releasing now,
and make HDTV right without pressure.

Kind regards,
Stefan

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Thomas Sailer

On Sun, 2008-02-03 at 13:34 +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:

 +1

Since I'm using Ville's Packages and he said yes, I also vote for yes.

Tom



___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Gregoire Favre
On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 06:07:20PM +0100, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:

 Well, then documenting that by calling it 1.6.0 now can't be that wrong ;-).

Yes, that's a good point :-)

 Once a 1.6.0 is out, there will only be bugfixes in it.
 No more changes to interfaces, functionality etc.



 Development will immediately resume with version 1.7.0.
 And there doesn't necessarily need to be a stable 1.8.0 - the next
 stable that includes DVB-S2 and H.264 could get the magical version
 number 2.0.0 ;-).

From HISTORY :

2000-02-19: Version 0.01
2000-07-25: Version 0.6
2001-01-18: Version 0.70
2001-06-02: Version 0.80
2001-08-06: Version 0.90
2002-02-10: Version 0.99
2002-04-07: Version 1.0.0 one month later :
2002-05-09: Version 1.1.0
2003-06-01: Version 1.2.0 a little later :
2004-01-04: Version 1.3.0
2006-04-30: Version 1.4.0 a little later :
2007-01-07: Version 1.5.0

So from what we see, my impression was right, after a stable release
it's a long time to start a new devel...

Maybe the solution would be to give stable responsability to someone
else like Linus do a solution ?

Any solution that will be choosen will be fine for me :-)

What I like with the idea of a 1.6 now is that it will help the
inclusion of multiproto into the kernel, and what I dislike is that it
will certainly slow down the H.264 integration...
-- 
Grégoire FAVRE  http://gregoire.favre.googlepages.com  http://www.gnupg.org
   http://picasaweb.google.com/Gregoire.Favre

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Reiner Buehl
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
...
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

 Yes or No?

I would vote for NO as the current status does not represent enough 
new functionality to justify a switch from 1.4.7 to the current version.
TS recording format would be such a migration reason for me.
 


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Stefan Hußfeldt
Klaus Schmidinger schrieb:

 So, here's the straw poll:
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 Yes or No?

Yes, I'ld prefer a stable 1.6.0 now or soon and DVB-S2 support in the
upcoming 1.7.x.

-- 
Und Tschüss.
Stefan

### Kilroy was here ### 2.6.20.2 up 197 days


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Achim Tuffentsammer
Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
 So, here's the straw poll:

Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

 Yes or No?

 Klaus

   
Yes



___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread syrius . ml
Klaus Schmidinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

 Yes or No?

No !

I'm still using 1.4.7.
It would have been a yes if :
- i was using 1.5 already
- new dev version 1.7 was about to be started at the same time and :
  * if development was about to change so that there will be a
(distributed) version control system and more than 1
branch/commiter
  * if the todo list was known and open
  * if multiple frontends/display with independant osd+control was in
the todo list
  * if the channel list was about to be revised so that it can handle
every specific needs
  * if config files were about to be in XML ! (nah kidding) *g*

NO I WON'T USE MYTHTV ! :-)

Cheers

-- 

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Halim Sahin
Hi,
fuuu vdr config files in xml 

Biiitte nicht.

BR.
Halim

-- 
Halim Sahin
E-Mail: 
halim.sahin (at) t-online.de

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Markku Virtanen
Hello Klaus!

No.

As it has been pointed out generally speaking texting support is not 
complete and if new version is released now, it never will. The problem
here is that functionality additions are not finished, only partially
and adding new stuff is started simultaneously.

Only reason for me to switch over from pathced 1.4 would be that
VDR supports complete subtitles and teletext.

When you set up a new stable version out what are you going to manifest 
there? Version 1.6.0: texting support yes / no? Partially yes / 
partially no? Take your poll... :)

The work you do with VDR is absolutely great but need for closure like
texting support has been there for years and VDR still is not going to 
support it properly not even 1.6.0 out of the box? Patch and patch again?

I'm just wondering can't one major issue be properly finished before 
hopping to another big issue, HDTV support? It can wait like texting 
support has been waiting for years for closure. Then texting support 
would be done and then feel free to do what ever is needed to support 
demands from HDTV users what ever schedule you decide. :D

Br, Markku

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Darren Salt
I demand that Rolf Ahrenberg may or may not have written...

[snip]
 The completition of H.264 support would be nice to have in next stable 
 version.  The H.264 support isn't related only to DVB-S2 as it's used 
 already in many DVB-C and DVB-T networks nowadays.

Then there's DVB-T2, which we should have late next year; but I expect that
that'll require multiproto support (and new cards!) anyway...

-- 
| Darren Salt| linux or ds at  | nr. Ashington, | Toon
| RISC OS, Linux | youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk | Northumberland | Army
| + Buy local produce. Try to walk or cycle. TRANSPORT CAUSES GLOBAL WARMING.

I'm making a home movie called The Thing That Grew in My Refrigerator.

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Theunis Potgieter
No

On 03/02/2008, Klaus Schmidinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 There has been some controversy about my recent decision to
 move forward and require the multiproto driver for VDR in
 the developer version. It is also currently rather unclear
 whether the current PES recording format can be kept to handle
 HDTV, or whether it would make sense (or even be feasible)
 to switch to TS (as suggested by the people from RMM).

 In order to take the edge of this, I was wondering if it would
 make sense to revoke the switch to the multiproto driver and
 go straight towards a stable version 1.6.0 with what is now in
 version 1.5.14. This should satisfy all those who are eagerly awaiting
 a new stable version, without forcing them to make the driver switch
 now.

 If we decide to go that way, I would release a version 1.5.15 with
 what could become the new stable, wait until like the end of the month
 to see whether it still needs some minor fixes, and call it 1.6.0 then.
 I know there are still some patches out there that some would expect
 to go into the next stable version, but I actually want to prepare VDR
 for HDTV before looking into these patches.

 So, here's the straw poll:

Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

 Yes or No?

 Klaus



 ___
 vdr mailing list
 vdr@linuxtv.org
 http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr




-- 
Style may not be the answer, but at least it's a workable alternative.

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Manu Abraham
Hi Patrick,

Patrick Boettcher wrote:
 Hi Klaus,
 
 On Sun, 3 Feb 2008, Klaus Schmidinger wrote:
Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?
 
 With H264 support, because some DVB-T channels (at least here in France) 
 are starting to carry H264-channels, afaiu unencrypted.
 
 With Multiproto support (DVB-S2), but only if VDR is able to switch to the 
 current DVB-API provided by standard kernels at compile time. I guess 
 Multiproto will not be there before 2.6.26 or even later. There is a bunch 
 of drivers currently not working with Multiproto.


Something that was broken with my changes, or was it the merge ?
Anything that you would like to point me to ?

(ISP is still not back in shape, Internet access is currently in a 
pathetic state)

Regards,
Manu

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Pizzak
Yes for version 1.6.0 now :)

---
Pizzak
Administrator of vdr-italia wiki
(http://vdr.spaghettilinux.org/)

___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Helmut Auer
Hi
 So, here's the straw poll:

Should there be a stable version 1.6.0 now, based on what's in
version 1.5.14, but without DVB-S2 or even H.264 support?

 Yes or No?
   
No,
The reason is really easy to explain:
I am happy with a stable 1.4.7 and I have no problem using a developer 
version, but if a new stable VDR version arrives, I will be forced to 
build an upgrade package for my Gen2VDR distri, which would cause some 
work 

Helmut


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


Re: [vdr] Straw poll: stable version 1.6.0 now?

2008-02-03 Thread Arthur Konovalov
Petri Helin wrote:

 If the h.264 support is left out, it's a no.

Same here.

AK


___
vdr mailing list
vdr@linuxtv.org
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr


  1   2   >