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 > email@example.com > http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr > _______________________________________________ vdr mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr