[theora] Ready for real use?

All Pebre all.i.pebre at gmail.com
Sat Sep 2 05:01:54 PDT 2006


I fully agree with Tim. I've been employing other alternatives for
years and theora is showing the same performance if not a better one.
It seems to be rock-solid. I'd change that alpha denomination and go
for 1.0.RC1 as soon as possible. You're puzzling people! And your
software is excellent!



2006/9/2, Tim Starling <tstarling at wikimedia.org>:
> Just passing through, evaluating Theora for possible use on Wikipedia.
> The alpha version number is indeed a put-off. Alpha doesn't mean there's
> features left you want to implement, that will always be the case, in
> all release versions. There's always room for improvement. Alpha means
> some significant part of the core functionality is broken or missing.
> One could argue that none of Theora's versions were truly alpha
> versions, since they were packaged up and released to the public. Once
> you release it to the public, it's a beta.
> I would very much like to see a better spin on Theora's stability, be it
> 1.0.0, 0.1.0, 1.0.beta1 or 1.0.RC1. "Alpha" implies that the developers
> do not want the public to use it, which is evidently not the case. You
> can leave the extra features for 1.1 or 2.0.
> -- Tim Starling
> _______________________________________________
> theora mailing list
> theora at xiph.org
> http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/theora

More information about the theora mailing list