[KDE] Which Phonon? Phonon backend - GStreamer or Xine?

[Lennart Poettering]

On Wed, 30.09.09 10:15, Jaroslav Reznik (jreznik at redhat.com) wrote:

> So where's the problem? There are two Phonons - one in Qt, one in KDE. I don't 
> like this schizophrenia. This should be solved but now we have to live with 
> one or another - that's why we brought this issue to the world.

Maybe KDE should add another abstraction layer on top of the various
Phonons which abstracts the differences between them! [1]

> But I'm happy you have joined this discussion as PA developer. How do you see 
> PA support in GStreamer and Xine? Functionality, features, support - regarding 
> to Fedora development as this could influence our final decision.

Isn't it obvious where the good stuff is? Just compare how many
commits happened in the last months to the xine-lib hg and how many
to the gst git trees. gst has a much much larger developer community
and multiple companies backing it. It's the only practical way to get
licenses MP3 codecs for Linux. And it is more powerful than xine in
many ways.

Also, my cooperation with the gst devs is much closer. I have
contributed some patches to xine a while back too, but since I don't
use it it is much more lacking.

Finally, Gst is used by Gnome. Would be great if this could be another
place were we could not only cooperate on specs but also actually
share code.

> Another interesting thing is PA & Phonon integration work by Colin Guthrie 
> (see the link in my first message). Phonon just as wrapper/thin client for PA 
> with nicer Qt like API. I like this idea. 

Uh, PA is a PCM sound server. Phonon an abstraction layer for general
media streaming. Those are different things. Yu can wrap PA and
gstreamer in phonon, but just wrapping PA alone won't fly.

Lennart

[1] That was a joke.

-- 
Lennart Poettering                        Red Hat, Inc.
lennart [at] poettering [dot] net
http://0pointer.net/lennart/           GnuPG 0x1A015CC4