[MPlayer-dev-eng] Re: MPlayer G2 (vlindos)

[Balatoni Denes]

Hi!

My point was that atm you can only distribute plugins as a patch.
No big deal, only you have to update it every week.

bye
Denes


On 2003. március 31. 23.15, Clemens Wächter wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Mar 2003 21:53:53 +0200
>
> Gábor Lénárt <lgb at lgb.hu> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 06:23:17PM +0100, Balatoni Denes wrote:
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > Another advantage of modularization is that 3rd parties can write
> > > plugins, and can distribute them separately in a convenient form (ie.
> > > not a patch)- no need to beg here for inclusion in cvs.
> >
> > Yes, but we should declare here that we don't want 'binary only' modules
> > for mplayer ... It's quite annoying not to be able to solve problems
> > and tracking bugs just because we haven't got ANY source ...
> > And of course binary level API compatibility is quite hard question ...
>
> I guess it's pointless, too. The companies today do not only want to make
> the thing working, they want even more. Unfortunately its not only about
> having a good file format, or making it a standart, its also about digital
> restriction management and copy protection etc.
>
> So my point is, if we really made a API which would support binary only
> plugins then no third party would want to make one as long as further data
> processing without the plugins consent is possible. And that will be
> possible as long as mplayer G2 is opensource (forever). At least that is
> what I experienced in the past.
>
>
> Clemens
>
> _______________________________________________
> MPlayer-dev-eng mailing list
> MPlayer-dev-eng at mplayerhq.hu
> http://mplayerhq.hu/mailman/listinfo/mplayer-dev-eng