Davide Cavalca wrote:
> I'm neither Klaus not a regular of this list, but I think you're not
> being fair here: Klaus has every right to say he won't develop on a
> community tree; it is, after all, his own free time. BTW, if I remember
> well, Klaus has coded several features (i.e. subtitles) he himself said
> he didn't use.
> Like it or not, VDR is a "cathedral"-style project: this has led to
> higher code quality and very good stability, at the expense of a slower
> development pace and the lack of some bleeding-edge features in the
> mainline. If you want those features, you can use a patch posted on this
> list (e.g. for hdtv, sourcecaps) or use a plugin (e.g. for teletext
> subtitles). Many distributions include those patches or provide a way
> for the user to easily appy them. Of course, you're also free to develop
> your own patches for new features: if they're good enough, I'm sure
> they'll eventually find their way into the mainline, as it happened,
> e.g., with the shutdown handling rewrite some time ago.
> You say you want to fork it: what would you accomplish with that? It's
> not as if the code would magically write itself. I've yet to see a
> single prospective developer say "if it were forked I'd write X". (And,
> BTW, there's nothing forbidding him to write X in form of a patch and
> post it on this list.) On the other hand, by forking you'd probably lose
> Klaus, who has written by himself the majority of VDR code and knows it
> like no one else.
> Finally, I personally fail to see why people switching to MythTV is a
> bad thing; VDR is not a religion, I think everyone should use whichever
> software he thinks suits best his needs. I'm very happy with VDR and
> won't be switching anytime soon.
Davide, I have been following VDR development since June 2000
and I have been subscribed to this list since January 2002.
I could not have put it better than you did above.
I totally agree with everything you said.
vdr mailing list