Gabriel Bouvigne wrote:
> Btw, I hope this patch is for 3.91 only and not 3.90, as I'd really like to
> see a 3.90 release soon (ie a maximum delay of a few weeks, not a few
> months)
> 

If enough people agree that 3.90 should be blessed with the status
of a stable release, then experimental changes that risk breaking
quality more than improving quality should wait until 3.91.  If
3.90 is just another beta, then a patch integrated as a
preliminary experimental option probably will not hurt.

Unless there are many broken options or much fresh code affecting
quality lurking in LAME, I would vote for 3.90 as a stable
release.  For a stable release, new options that are somewhat
broken or that have not been well tested should not be advertised
on the command line.  If we have a document that details all the
switches, this document could cover the unstable options, but
clearly emphasize the instability.

If we do choose to target 3.90 as a stable release, I propose
the elimination of bugs in "--nogap" as a metric for when a
pre-release feature freeze is ready.  To push a release forward, 
features that haven't been around since 3.89b could be put on an
unadvertised/unstable list if they are less than ready at that
time.  I suggest "--nogap" as a metric because, when applicable,
it can offer a gain in quality and functionality, and because
eliminating audible glitches is a prime concern of audio encoding.
This feature has been around since 3.89b, and is worth fixing up.

Kind regards,

- John
_______________________________________________
mp3encoder mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder

Reply via email to