https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=490860
--- Comment #10 from agap...@hotmail.com <agap...@hotmail.com> --- (In reply to Noah Davis from comment #9) > (In reply to agap...@hotmail.com from comment #8) > > (In reply to Noah Davis from comment #5) > > > We can mark this as a duplicate of your feature request once you've done > > > it > > > > I wanted to ask - what is the advantage of KPipewire over regular Pipewire? > > Perhaps adding the option of using regular pipewire as a backend to > > spectacle would simplify development by adding the ability to add desktop > > sound and improve screen capture quality, as the devs would no longer be > > constrained by the features available in Kpipewire? > > KPipeWire is a simplified abstraction library for using PipeWire (with > FFmpeg for recording video) in Qt apps. Switching Spectacle to regular > PipeWire would be more work than adding audio support to KPipeWire because > we'd have to reimplement support for what we already have and still have to > implement audio support. Audio and video frames aren't automatically mixed > together by PipeWire just because PipeWire can handle audio and video, so > it's not like there's an easy way out of implementing audio recording > support somewhere. We're constrained because there is currently nobody > available with the right kind of skills to do the work of implementing audio > support. This problem would still exist with or without KPipeWire. Maybe > someday somebody will have the time and skills required to do it. Thank you for your response Noah :) that makes sense. It's a huge shame, if I had the money I would offer a bounty to help get it up to snuff since I can't offer coding expertise. But unfortunately, I am a broke college student. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
