Re: GStreamer regression analysis [was: GNOME and GStreamer]

[Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net>]

A few comments,

On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 17:48 +0000, Tim Müller wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 20:28 -0500, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> 
> Hi Ronald,
<snip>
> > ..., I get multiple or no error dialogs, which gives the
> > impression of bad integration of GStreamer backend in Totem
> > frontend.
> > - the video screen does not update when a menu is expanded and then
> > clicked away. The video screen becomes cyan (?!), instead of the nice
> > Totem logo from Jakub.
> 
> Ugly, but rather minor issues IMHO.

The second one, yeah, I agree, minor. Floods or no error dialogues is
bad, very bad, unless you intend on people still considering GStreamer
as experimental.

> > - first start takes hellishly long (>10s on my laptop), apparently
> > because of a registry rebuild. You'll need to provide some user feedback
> > here (e.g. a splash screen), the user will think the app is broken and
> > Linux (or GNOME, for that matter) sucks.
> 
> That's a long time indeed (even if it only happens once). A better
> solution though would be if packages with plugins ran gst-inspect-0.10
> in their post-install, which should eliminate the need to automatically
> re-build the plugin registry when starting a GStreamer application after
> that, as gst-inspect has already caused it to be rebuilt after package
> installation. I consider this a packaging problem in the end. We should
> celebrate the fact that there is no more gst-register in 0.10 by the
> way, after it caused quite a few problems in 0.8.

No, gst-register wasn't causing problems in 0.8, it was the fact that it
was *required* to run gst-register and have applications crash otherwise
that was causing problems. Where was it explained that gst-inspect
should be run when new plugins are installed? Why remove gst-register if
it's simply to have it replaced by another program?

<snip>
>  - totem-video-thumbnailer needs some love, files that don't start up to
>          play won't work here either (plus a video format
>          conversion issue in the thumbnailer itself).

I don't quite understand what problems there are in the thumbnailer.

<snip>
> 0.10 may not be as good as 0.8 yet in every respect, but we're talking
> about a timeframe of 6-9 months from March here (and it is already

Meaning it would be ready for 2.16? :)

> better in many other respects). A lot of progress will be made until
> March, and it will continue to be made after that. 0.8 on the other hand
> will more or less stagnate minus a few crasher fixes here and there, and
> its progress will depend entirely on how much free time and motivation
> you have besides your other committments.

Cheers

---
Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net>