[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-multimedia
Subject:    RE: why should KDE use MAS?
From:       "Piriou, Philippe (BDA)" <Philippe.Piriou2 () eads-telecom ! com>
Date:       2003-02-27 8:03:37
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi,

considering a new alternative multimedia framework (not sound server) for
KDE, only one use C++ while all the others use C: it's  >NMM
(http://www.networkmultimedia.org/): <http://www.networkmultimedia.org/):> 

I believe using C++ is a major feature for adoption by KDE programmers and
integration in KDE, as well. 

Here, I don't speak of codecs which are all developped by third party using
C.

     In fact, NMM is kind of Gstreamer written in C++ (but less mature since
it's newer).

Philippe


	-----Message d'origine-----
	De:	Navindra Umanee [mailto:navindra@cs.mcgill.ca]
	Date:	jeudi 27 février 2003 03:55
	À:	mas@shiman.com
	Cc:	kde-multimedia@mail.kde.org
	Objet:	why should KDE use MAS?

	Hello, 

	The KDE project (http://www.kde.org/) appears to be considering
	alternative solutions to the native aRts sound framework for its
	video/multimedia needs, and MAS has come up in the discussion.

	Would you care to make the case for why KDE should adopt MAS and how
	it should go about doing that?  How well do you think MAS will fit
	into the KDE philosophy and general framework?  What rate of
progress
	can we expect regarding codecs and video support?  Other leading
	contenders appear to be gstreamer, jack, xine, csl,
	http://www.networkmultimedia.org/,...

	For more information on the kde-multimedia list please see
	http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-multimedia .  If you would
	prefer not to subscribe, I can forward any of your messages for you.

	Archive: http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-multimedia&r=1&b=200302&w=2 

	Related threads so far:

	http://lists.kde.org/?t=104596391100001&r=1&w=2&n=39
	http://lists.kde.org/?t=104593941100002&r=1&w=2&n=10
	http://lists.kde.org/?t=104613567900001&r=1&w=2&n=10
	http://lists.kde.org/?t=104567450200014&r=1&w=2&n=66

	Thanks,
	Navin.

	Tim Jansen <tjansen@gmx.net> wrote:
	> On Tuesday 25 February 2003 03:01, Navindra Umanee wrote:
	> > > - a person who wants to propose a framework will do analysis
of it based
	> > > on the above list. That will immediately tell us which
frameworks are
	> > > better suited for our needs.
	> > Any opinions on MAS?
	> > http://www.mediaapplicationserver.net/
	>
	> Yes, earlier in this thread. Summary: IMHO the only sound server
	> that did the network design right, but not many codecs, no video
	> support yet and not broad enough for a general purpose framework.
At
	> least at this point.
	>
	> _______________________________________________
	> kde-multimedia mailing list
	> kde-multimedia@mail.kde.org
	> http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-multimedia
	_______________________________________________
	kde-multimedia mailing list
	kde-multimedia@mail.kde.org
	http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-multimedia
_______________________________________________
kde-multimedia mailing list
kde-multimedia@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-multimedia
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]