Re: [gupnp] DLNA profile detection & automatic transcoding

[Sven Neumann <s neumann raumfeld com>]

On Mon, 2010-06-14 at 16:04 +0300, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote:

>    Instead of dwelling in arguments, please feel free to provide
> patches that makes gstreamer an optional dep but do provide at least
> one non-gstreamer implementation for the same APIs.

Wait, this is not something that can be solved by patches. This is a
design decision in the first place, not an implementation detail that
can be fixed later.

So the question here is where to draw the line for gupnp-av. Currently
it is a helper library for writing and parsing DIDL-Lite fragments. That
makes it useful for many applications and as such ensures that many
applications will provide proper DIDL-Lite and that many applications
can share the parser code.

Now you are pulling functionality into gupnp-av that does IMO belong
into the actual media-server implementation. Of course if the goal of
gupnp-av is to allow people to implement a media-server in a few lines
of code, because all the functionality is already in gupnp-av, then this
is the right way to go. But if you want more applications than just
rygel to benefit from gupnp-av, then perhaps you should not make
gupnp-av too specialised and keep this code in rygel.

It's up to the gupnp-av developers to decide where to draw the line. We
are going to continue support for gupnp-av only as long as we can
actually use it. If it becomes too specialised, then it will become
easier for us to implement our own library for writing and parsing
DIDL-Lite fragments. But I would really like to continue to use
gupnp-av.


Greetings,
Sven


-- 
Sven Neumann
Head of Software Development

RAUMFELD GmbH | Reichenberger Str. 124 | 10999 Berlin | Germany
Tel: +49.30.340.60.98.0 | Fax: +49.30.340.60.98.99 | s neumann raumfeld com