[Lame-dev] New lame upstream release?

[Reinhard Tartler]

On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 19:48:05 (CEST), Rogério Brito 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.

Andres, may I suggest that instead of placing patches inline in
debian/lame-get-orig-source.sh, we create an 'upstream-dfsg' branch, do
modifications there directly and roll tarballs from that?

>> 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...

Unforunately, this won't work easily because frontend/main.c uses
functions from portableio.h unconditionally. We'd therefore need some
more patches. Anyone familiar with the codebase and willing to
contribute that patch?

> 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... :-(

Doesn't the package lack a dependency on lame? AFAIUI it is a tool to
reencode .mp3 files. I persume that it uses lame for that, but the
documentatin isn't entirely clear on that.

-- 
Gruesse/greetings,
Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4