Compiling SVN; was: Jerky 1080p h264 playback
|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 01:00 -0700, RC wrote: > On Mon, 17 May 2010 06:30:38 +0300 > Uoti Urpala <uoti.urpala at pp1.inet.fi> wrote: > > > How would that help users? The improvements are already available to > > them in git. > > You're suggesting that your fork is superior to MPlayer in every > concievable way? I'm sure even you don't believe that. No, I'm not claiming that the git repo would be superior to svn in _every_ conceivable way. You invented that phrasing. I believe it's better for most users. And what determines that trying to move improvements to svn would not help users is this: it would take much less effort to fix any problems in git than to backport features to svn. > And if nothing else, MPlayer is getting actively developed by several > people, while your fork is just that... svn is not being "actively developed by several people". Reimar is the only developer who prefers the svn repo and can be said to be actively working on code. Carl has done some smaller stuff. > I see no sign that there's any > chance of your fork becoming the official version of MPlayer. You've > certainly burned enough bridges... How do you define "the official"? Anyway that's not very relevant to the original subject; people can use it regardless of whatever name you use to refer to it.