On Friday, July 20, 2012 19:24:17, Don Armstrong wrote: > On Sat, 21 Jul 2012, Ron wrote: > > One very last thing then, before I hopefully stop bothering you for > > > > a while (: > > > ** Use speex instead > > > > > > + Clients cannot currently report speex version during codec > > > selection process > > > > I don't understand where that issue came from? > > Speex has been API and bitstream compatible since, like 2006, or maybe > > before. > > > > Maybe I totally misunderstand what that's saying, but anything relying on > > a "speex version" is almost surely Doing It Wrong. > > Chris asked for this to be added IIRC; I believe[1] that this should > really be "currently report speex support" rather than "speex > version".
Yes I think the above wording is better. I was reading code where several versions of CELT are reported and versions compared -- and since there isn't any code for reporting speex availability, I made an assumption as to how that would theoretically be handled. > Don Armstrong > > 1: Hopefully I'll be corrected if I'm wrong; it's likely that I > introduced the incorrect wording too. With a list of complications this long, something will end up being worded wrong. ;-) -- Chris -- Chris Knadle chris.kna...@coredump.us -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
