[Lame-dev] New lame upstream release?

[Andres Mejia]

On Jul 27, 2011 1:48 PM, "Rogério Brito" <rbrito at ime.usp.br> wrote:
>
> Dear people,
>
> I'm in the middle of a power outage right now, using the last few
> drops of energy of notebook battery and a 3G connection, so I will be
> brief. (Oh, please keep in the CC'ies to me).
>
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 14:41, Andres Mejia <mcitadel at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jul 26, 2011 12:49 PM, "robert" <Robert.Hegemann at gmx.de> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Rogério.
> >>
> >> Am 26.07.2011, 16:24 Uhr, schrieb Rogério Brito <rbrito at ime.usp.br>:
> >>
> >>
> >>>> We're just waiting for a new release of lame with all the license
> >>>> clarification changes before uploading lame to Debian. :-)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I don't think that we will be able to release anything in time for
> > DebConf,
> >>> as LAME is just beginning to get into the beta stage.
> >>
> >>
> >> What time frame are we talking about?
> >>
> >> From my point of view, there may be some small patches to apply
> >> and then release 3.99:
> >>
> >> 1 - pending LGPL patch
> >> 2 - eventually changing default behaviour for ID3v2 unicode tags.
> >>
> >> What do the others think?
>
> Robert, it seems that Andres just adopted the suggestion that I gave
> him of backporting some changes. Regarding a new release, I think that
> we may need to include one extra thing in our TODO list. See below.
>
> > I was simply going to backport the lgpl patches and upload the last
release.
> > I suppose there's no need to wait for a new release now.
>
> Andres, I just saw that LAME was rejected by the FTP masters:
>
>
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/2011-July/020498.html
>
> That part is only used if we use lame's internal IO routines. Just rip
> that apart and link with libsndfile and we're done. Please reupload
> that...
>
> I am motivated enough to get LAME into Debian that I am *seriously*
> planning to rewrite that portion of the code for the next stable
> release, implementing just the bare minimum that is needed for LAME to
> work (and, of course, not reproducing Erik Castro's work with
> sndfile).
>
> Most of the functions in portableio.[ch] are quite trivial, anyway...
> You can tell that I *badly* want LAME in Debian, can't you?
> (Especially now that it seems that the FTP masters are convinced that
> such software is Free Software).
>
> Oh, hint, hint for the multimedia maintainers: what about uploading my
> already packaged mp3packer from my launchpad PPA? [0]
>
> [0]:
https://launchpad.net/~rbrito/+archive/ppa/+files/mp3packer_1.20-1~ubuntu1.dsc
>
> OK, the battery of my laptop is running out... :-(
>
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 4096R/BCFCAAAA
> http://rb.doesntexist.org : Packages for LaTeX : algorithms.berlios.de
> DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br

I was going to replace that code myself actually. I had the idea of using
only portableio.h with inline functions and removing portableio.c.

Also, i've had a problem before with using sndfile with lame and k3b. Not
sure if that's been resolved by now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/attachments/20110727/f9f9ee2a/attachment.html>