BeSweet and GPL respect (or LGPL) and lack thereof.

[int 21h]

Obviously this needs to be said that a good portion of the BeSweet code is based on previous functionality found in GPL and LGPL'd applications. Encapsulating all of the functionality into respective linked libraries in itself dictates that at least the source code changes for those libraries be published, furthermore, in previous cases (Vidomi), it has been argued that this is also a violation of GPL and LGPL regulations.

Let's not forget the original author's intent here, and be respective of those who first chiseled out the work to let applications like BeSweet function. It is all about respect.

From the LGPL (http://www.fsf.org/copyleft/lgpl.html)
4. You may copy and distribute the Library (or a portion or derivative of it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange.


More information about the specifics of the licenses can be obtained at http://www.fsf.org/copyleft/lgpl.html and http://www.fsf.org/copyleft/gpl.html.

[DSPguru]

BeSweet.exe was written from scratch.
all the dlls i use, except ssrc.dll, are the official ones.
ssrc.dll was created by me. and as far as i know, ssrc is under lgpl, and that means i don't have to release the source-code.

hell, and what are all the those talking about respect ?! did you happen to see this in BeSweet :
Using ssrc.dll v1.28 by Naoki Shibata (shibatch@geocities.co.jp)
it doesn't even mention my work on this dll !!!

now, could you please be more specifiec, and tell me what was the violation you were talking about ?

or are you talking about the idea of adding presets to lame_enc.dll ?

fyi :
Midas mailed me azid.dll personally.
[maven] gave his blessings for BeSweet integration with vstrip.dll
lame developrs know about BeSweet, as they added my floating-point function to lame_enc.dll .
Naoki is also a member of the lame group, and also got my mail about ssrc.dll


now i wonder what made you come and post this thread.
probably this :
Originally posted by ChristianHJW
...... right now, and i agree here with a comment from somebody else, there is not much to do. Be honest, DSPguru's Besweet is the most exciting new soft to come out for quite some time .... or did i miss something ?

[int 21h]

Originally posted by DSPguru
BeSweet.exe was written from scratch.
all the dlls i use, except ssrc.dll, are the official ones.
ssrc.dll was created by me. and as far as i know, ssrc is under lgpl, and that means i don't have to release the source-code.

hell, and what are all the those talking about respect ?! did you happen to see this in BeSweet :
Using ssrc.dll v1.28 by Naoki Shibata (shibatch@geocities.co.jp)
it doesn't even mention my work on this dll !!!

now, could you please be more specifiec, and tell me what was the violation you were talking about ?

or are you talking about the idea of adding presets to lame_enc.dll ?

fyi :
Midas mailed me azid.dll personally.
[maven] gave his blessings for BeSweet integration with vstrip.dll
lame developrs know about BeSweet, as they added my floating-point function to lame_enc.dll .
Naoki is also a member of the lame group, and also got my mail about ssrc.dll



Actually, what prompted me to post this was my starting work on integrating toolame and SSRC into DVD2AVI for svcd usage.

There are currently two violations with BeSweet. The first is with the distribution. If you are using GPL'd code you need to make that clear, and either provide a link for that code, or provide that code directly. (I showed you that part of the license in the previous post) Second, you cannot link together GPL code in the form of external open source modules with a closed source application. You make use of Mp3 Library which specifically states it is GPL code, to be used under GPL terms. ( http://www.virtualdub.org/virtualdub_news_vidomi ) I am not familiar with azid's or vstrip's license terms, but if they wish no source to be required (azid is closed source afaik) then they should be LGPL like lame_enc.dll.

[DarkAvenger]

Yeah, i am also annoyed that instead of giving me the source of ssrc.dll you gave me a link to the original one. So how can I enhance your ssrc.dll without me doing all the work you did again? :( (Of course I'll release the modified source of SSRC then...)

I just wanted to mail you about the portion int 21h quoted from the *LGPL*. As I understand it you have to include the sources to ssrc.dll, or what else do you read of $4? So I would be happy if you released the corresponfing sources.

It is not about BeSweet. LGPL clearly states that you don't have to give its sources, but about ssrc.dll, which is a derivative of the library "SSRC" and thus you have to accompany
it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code - just to quote the specific parts.

[DarkAvenger]

@int 21h

I haven't read the GPL extensively, but LGPL allows close source programs to link to LGPL libs, at least if it is done dynamicaly ("work that uses the library" $5). Is LAME under LGPL or GPL? As I linked everything dynamically and HeadAC3he's core functions work without any .dll, I think I am not doing anything wrong.

BTW, do you know how to compile toolame with MSVC6? I am thinking of making a dll out of it. But without even getting the .exe to compile it is rather hopeless.

[int 21h]

Originally posted by DarkAvenger
@int 21h

I haven't read the GPL extensively, but LGPL allows close source programs to link to LGPL libs, at least if it is done dynamicaly ("work that uses the library" $5). Is LAME under LGPL or GPL? As I linked everything dynamically and HeadAC3he's core functions work without any .dll, I think I am not doing anything wrong.

BTW, do you know how to compile toolame with MSVC6? I am thinking of making a dll out of it. But without even getting the .exe to compile it is rather hopeless.

Lame_enc.dll is under LGPL, which can be linked and used with a closed source interface. MP3 Library, is under GPL, which cannot be.

I have not looked at Toolame extensively yet, I've just been tinkering.

[DarkAvenger]

YES, I managed to compile that bugger after some minor mods to the source. Well, I just see that toolame is under GPL. Well then it is worthless for me to make a dll out of it...

[int 21h]

Originally posted by DarkAvenger
YES, I managed to compile that bugger after some minor mods to the source. Well, I just see that toolame is under GPL. Well then it is worthless for me to make a dll out of it...

I guess it depends what you want to use it for. You could still make a dll and release the source for it, but if your main program is closed source, that's a no-no.

I also got it to compile, simply needed to not include pds_subband.c (testing file) and change INLINE to __inline. :)

[DarkAvenger]

Yes, I did something similar to the code. ;)

But as I want HeadAC3he to be close-sourse, no go for me with tooLame without violation. Or would it be possible to ask the original author Mike Cheng, if I could release the dll as LGPL?

[int 21h]

I think that would possibly work. Lame_enc.dll is LGPL while LAME itself is GPL.

[DarkAvenger]

Just mailed hin. Hoping to get positive response. :)

[int 21h]

how does headac3he decode ac3s?

[DSPguru]

Originally posted by int 21h


Actually, what prompted me to post this was my starting work on integrating toolame and SSRC into DVD2AVI for svcd usage.
so you're basicly interested in my understandment of ssrc.c ...
you know that there are better ways to ask for help rather then posting this kind of thread ;)
if you like, i can send you ssrc.h of my dll, and also, could release BeSweet.dll , as i know that the idea of DVD2AVI & BeSweet integration was raised in the past.

There are currently two violations with BeSweet. The first is with the distribution. If you are using GPL'd code you need to make that clear, and either provide a link for that code, or provide that code directly. (I showed you that part of the license in the previous post) Second, you cannot link together GPL code in the form of external open source modules with a closed source application. You make use of Mp3 Library which specifically states it is GPL code, to be used under GPL terms. ( http://www.virtualdub.org/virtualdub_news_vidomi ) I am not familiar with azid's or vstrip's license terms, but if they wish no source to be required (azid is closed source afaik) then they should be LGPL like lame_enc.dll. so the onLy problem is with mpglib.dll .
well, that's okay, i found that mpglib.dll is a bugger, and plan to switch it with another (lgpl) library anyway.

So long,
Dg.

[DarkAvenger]

@DG
So will you release SSRC.dll source? I would like to have it, as well?

@int 21h
It uses azid.dll, as well.

[Gabriel_Bouvigne]

Lame is gpl and not lgpl?? Are you sure about it?

I think it's only gpl is you use the decoding library.

[int 21h]

Originally posted by Gabriel_Bouvigne
Lame is gpl and not lgpl?? Are you sure about it?

I think it's only gpl is you use the decoding library.

Lame.exe is GPL, Lame_enc.dll is LGPL.

[int 21h]

Originally posted by DSPguru
so you're basicly interested in my understandment of ssrc.c ...
you know that there are better ways to ask for help rather then posting this kind of thread if you like, i can send you ssrc.h of my dll, and also, could release BeSweet.dll , as i know that the idea of DVD2AVI & BeSweet integration was raised in the past.


The release of BeSweet.dll would be appreciated. I wasn't specifically trying to be rude or impolite towards you, its just frustrating sometimes to see open source software wrapped up into closed source applications. It makes it impossible to further the use of that originally open source work.

[DarkAvenger]

@DSPGuru

You seem to ignore my asks for the ssrc.dll sources, which I dislike very much. I even don't get it why? If I would work on open-source stuff, I would give out the sources out, as well. That is the concept of it. Till now I respected you very much, because of your skills and helpfulness, but you're about to loose my sympathy as you blatantly violate LGPL. I think Doom9 needs to be informed as well, as it will not be good for him and his site if one of his mods is acting in this shaming way. (That’s one of the reasons, as well, why I chose not to be a mod. Beside a certain level of power it means a lot of responsibility, as well.)
If you're just organizing your sources for release, then I'll take everything back. But it is a fact that you didn't react to my postings. So what else should I think? You're welcome to reply.

If you still didn’t understand, read my very first post in this thread again.

[DSPguru]

@DA
Originally posted by DarkAvenger
[B]@DSPGuru

You seem to ignore my asks for the ssrc.dll sources, which I dislike very much. I even don't get it why? If I would work on open-source stuff, I would give out the sources out, as well. That is the concept of it.yada-yada-yada..
'till now it only go one way-around : i create something, and you use it on your proggy.
examples :
- i wrote the Floating-Point function interface for Lame, and then guided you on using this function in HeadAC3e.
- i created ssrc.dll, and nowdays, guiding you of using it in HeadAC3e.
- i will add Alt-Presets compatability to Lame, and then, you'll use it.
so, let's not forget this. ok.. ?

Till now I respected you very much, because of your skills and helpfulness, but you're about to loose my sympathy as you blatantly violate LGPL.a. i am NOT violating LPGL.
b. so i'm less skilled now ?
I think Doom9 needs to be informed as well, as it will not be good for him and his site if one of his mods is acting in this shaming way. (That’s one of the reasons, as well, why I chose not to be a mod. Beside a certain level of power it means a lot of responsibility, as well.) Doom9, feel free to unmod me :D
If you're just organizing your sources for release, then I'll take everything back. But it is a fact that you didn't react to my postings. So what else should I think? You're welcome to reply.i DONT have to release ssrc.c , and still haven't decided on this issue. anyway, if YOU want to contribute to the open-source community, YOU should publish HeadAC3he source-codes, and create toolame.dll or ssrc.dll and Guide me to use it in BeSweet.
after all, you don't like my design of ssrc.dll, and plan to create ssrc.dll by yourself. so why won't you download the sources from Naoki's site and start worKing instead of threatning ?!


believe me, people in this forum ain't stupid. they know that lots of good coders tried to make ssrc.dll, but i'm the only one to succed understanding Naoki's source-code.
they can see the two sides of the arguments.
they know that i'm very Flexible and helpful, and that BeSweet have become what it have become just caused i cared.
as lots of people know, I AM NOT A DIVX CODER, i NEVER encoded a divx film ever in my life.
BeSweet is simply my service to all the divx coders out there.


@int $21
contact me personally, and we'll design BeSweet.dll's function interfaces.

[DarkAvenger]

yada-yada-yada..

Congarts! A very intelligent statement! :rolleyes:

i create something, and you use it on your proggy.

So what? Do you have a problem with this? Don't forget that I always credited you for your work. Furthermore is it so hard for you to stay in-topic? Or are you just afraid of me and my program? Too funny that I don't fear you. :) As i already stated in a mail, the optimal situation would be if you enhance the low-level dlls and I integrate them, since as soon as I offer the same function as BeSweet does, mine is clearly faster. But the good is of course, BeSweet keeps me motivated to invest time in HeadAC3he. So back to topic.

a. i am NOT violating LPGL.

Either I or you can't read. So once again for the slow guys:


From the LGPL (http://www.fsf.org/copyleft/lgpl.html)
4. You may copy and distribute the Library (or a portion or derivative of it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange.



ssrc.dll, which is a derivative of the library "SSRC" and thus you have to accompany
it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code.


Got it now?!? Otherwise please tell me where it is written, that you have *not* to give out the source.

Or to make you use your brain: Does it make sense, that portions of a (LGPL) open-source projects are allowed to be used in another project, if this project is close-source?!?

b. so i'm less skilled now ?

For someone trying to be logical this is ashaming. :D

(A=>B) <=> (!B=>!A) is correct but here A!=skillful&&helpful... In fact A is a superset...

YOU should publish HeadAC3he source-codes

Ha ha! That was a good one, esp coming from you. (see topic)

and create toolame.dll

I'd like to, if it can be released under LGPL. It is written in this thread.:rolleyes:

so why won't you download the sources from Naoki's site and start worKing instead of threatning ?!

It is not about liking, it simply doesn't fit my needs. So instead of going through the same s### as you did, I want your source as a starting point, so it should be easier. Why do you feel threatened? I am not threatening you. It seems you are very paranoid. If you can think logical, you know that everythink I stated *is* logical.
Another thing is, I don't know whether it is really worth spending so much time on this, as in a few years, DVD-R burners are so cheap, I won't use HeadAC3he for transcodng the ac3...

they know that lots of good coders tried to make ssrc.dll, but i'm the only one to succed understanding Naoki's source-code.
a) You are repeating yourself.
b) I know you seem to be a good coder which doesn't contradicts to anything I said.

BeSweet is simply my service to all the divx coders out there.

So why don't you do some more good service, and just give out the source of ssrc.dll, as it should be the case. For a wannabe-scientist you don't seems to be able to handle logics too well (not even mentioning that this more sounds like a politician). :P So make a better try this time...
I am trying to be objective as far as I can, but when I feel annoyed and people are stuborn, I loose my patience.

So instead of silly talk, either proove me wrong or accept that you are wrong. I hope you see that your statements are much more contradicting than mine. It is just about keeping to the rulez. You are not.

[DarkAvenger]

BTW, I am not attacking you because you make a competition program (in fact I think competition is very good for everyone), simply because I would like to have the sources. But it seems as though you are thinking something else...:mad:

[Doom9]

please try to remain civil

@dspguru: check your pm inbox

[DSPguru]

@DA
you're just being ungrateful :( - and you know it !

@Doom9
i will release ssrc.dll's source-code. okay :)

[DarkAvenger]

you're just being ungrateful - and you know it !

Could you please show me where?!? What more do you expect than recommendations of both of our proggies, credits for your work? Did I ever say BeSweet bad, HeadAC3he good? I only state things which are *ojectively* true. Even being pissed off by your stubborness, in the thread http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14729 I left it to the user to decide and conclude both progs are good. If you want me to praise you God-like, you can wait for infinity++.:p

I am treating you more than fair, but I always have the feeling that you simply don't trust me. Then it is your paranoia, not mine. Reminds me somehow of Shrek: Someone needed to compensate for something... :D

It is about *you* being not objective which drives me mad. Why are you everthing taking personal? It is not easy to handle someone having your character.

Even when I informed Doom9 about this, I used following sentence: "könntest du mal so gütig sein, den obigem thread im Audio Forum angucken und entweder mich oder DSPGuru zurechtweisen." Ask Doom9 what it means, if you can't read German...

So now I went too offtopic. To prevent this, think twice before stating something which is not true.

But nice to see, that you release the sources. Was all this really needed? :rolleyes: Please post the link.

I hope you *really* don't take this all too personal and we can cooperate in a constructive way, as it used to be.

[DSPguru]

ok, sources are up (http://dspguru.notrace.dk/ssrc.zip).

@DA
there's one thing you keep ignoring when writing :
in fact I think competition is very good for everyoneandwe can cooperate in a constructive way, as it used to bethis constructive way was alwaYs me helping you.
i already wrote about this, and m not going to repeat myself.

Originally posted by DarkAvenger
I always have the feeling that you simply don't trust mei don't.

[DarkAvenger]

this constructive way was alwaYs me helping you.
i already wrote about this, and m not going to repeat myself.

Well, you forget that I had some good ideas, as well. And I tried to answer your qs, as good as I could. (Of course I asked more, but that it matter of fact. If you don't ask, how can I help?) And who helped you to make compile sizes smaller? Now I could ask myself who is being ungrateful? *Now* I do see, that you are not able to make objective statements. It is more like generalization ("always"), something I am getting used to from your side. Try to find generalization on my side. You'll find it hardly. (of course you must read closely to see that I do not generalize. I choose my words wiser than it seems.)

But I don't see where I contradict with my statement that competition is good for everyone? Where am I trying to push you out of business? If it just by being faster I won't apologize. :p
To be more specific: I never haven't seen you recommending my prog, even though you haven't said anything against it. But you may ask doom9 how I act in q-bert.org or dvdboard.de. I usually say something like "try BeSweet or HeadAC3he". Even here in this forum I sometimes recommend both, but here you are there to speak for your own prog, so I am not pushing your prog so hard.

i don't.

I am not an expert on English, as logically it would mean you negate my sentence, but in the sense of meaning it probably means that you do not trust me. So the very first time you're being real. I apreciate this. Before you were like a politician: Showing nice face, but thinking bad. That's why I could be angry about you, as I mailed you: Calling me "friend" with the phrase being rather meaningless and in fact an utter lie, as
a) You *now* admit you don't trust me.
b) You don't care for personal relationships (virt.).
c) We don't have a personal relationship (and it will never happen though).

I hesitated to call you "friend" if you remember. I started with "I don't see you as foe", which is something which is true.

In fact even from your nick a flaw of personality could be shown. When you first emerged here I was suspicious, but you showed your knowledge and skillfulness, so I accepted and respected you. Nevertheless calling oneself "guru" seems to be a bit arrogant, at least it shows of minor self esteem. I rather chose a meaningless or even ridiculous nick, so people won't respect me of my nick, but of my knowledge and deeds - if the do so.

I am a bit longer in this business and I know that when I do something, I do it best possible. So if then someone manages to be better he deserves my admiration, as I see I can still learn. So unlike you, I won't mind competition. (Perhaps it is just frustrating for you, that you put so much effort in your prog and still are not better in the sense of speed and ease of use, which is a major factor for people to choose?)

Do you now see the difference of who is speaking *objective* truth and who is not?

[Doom9]

come on you guys.. this is getting us nowhere :/

[DarkAvenger]

It is simply about me disliking liars or people making statements without proofs.

[Doom9]

not helping. I'm not asking you to love each other.. but at least try to get along and keep it civil in my forum. competition doesn't mean you have to bark at each other every time you meet.

[DarkAvenger]

As I stated some times, I did not have any problems and I don't like any problems. But unfortunately not everybody can see as far as me... ;) No really, as you can read, I am just interested in peaceful and constructive co-existence. But it is not easy if you are not trusted out of no reason (esp. if these person(s) behave in another way and hide their true motives.)

competition doesn't mean you have to bark at each other every time you meet.

I hope you don't start generelization, as well... :rolleyes: But it is good to c that you stay neutral.

[ChristianHJW]

Originally posted by Doom9 come on you guys.. this is getting us nowhere :/
Fully agree here ....

I had 2 young coders showing up in PowerDivX.com DirectShowFilter Development section. Both are into DSF coding ..... my heart was beating like crazy, i thought wow .... this is it, now we get a lot of useful filters done ...... but i was wrong !!

Guess what ? .... there are certainly more than 10 brilliant mediaplayers out there ( you forgive me mentioning Blacksun's player first ;) ) :

PowerDivX
BS Player
Zoomplayer
Sasami 2 k
MicroDVD
etc.

... and these two guys dont have anything else in mind than doing a new player !! Of course .... not one player together ,no .... both want to a player of their own !

I highly admire the way Matthias Lenk was creating his brilliant Dedynamic DirectShowFilter. I had the chance to check out Dedynamic.exe, liked the program and thought : ... wow, we need this as a DirectShowFilter in our players. I contacted the guy, told him what we want, he said fine, read the M$ DirectShow SDK and one week later we had the 1st filter for betatesting.

The filter is not open source :( , but :

- this guy never made a big hassle about his name being mentioned somewhere or him getting big ovations from the community
- he was not creating the 'super-duper-all-in-one' program replacing Virtualdub, but just a small, but very useful filter
- his motivation was in 1st instance to create another piece of well-done, well-working code

I normally shouldnt post here ( i know that ) because i'm no coder myself, all i can contribute is some betatesting and news spreading.
Plus, i understand very well that coders are not doing this for fun only :

They want to be respected and maybe even a bit admired for what they do !

But the current situation with Besweet and HeadAC3he, IMHO, is annoying ! There are two programs doing absolutely the same, using the same .dll's in some cases, both are coded with huge amount of time to be invested ( which honestly doesnt make sense to me ) ..... and now the two coders even start wasting their time by arguing whether and how any code should be released or not.

I will not stand to any party here as i may claim i do have ( and always had ) good relationship to both of you guys ...... but this is really stupid !!

Please, stop it !! Stop it now !!!

[Doom9]

and.. you can get ssrc.c @ dspguru.doom9.net.. at least that is resolved now.

[DarkAvenger]

and now the two coders even start wasting their time by arguing whether and how any code should be released or not.

It was just about ssrc.dll, which broke LGPL. Now he seems to have released it, and I would be happy. (Have you seen him stating, he was wrong and /or apologizing?)
But unfortunately he started making statements without any sense - at least in my eyes. So what do you expect? If I say something wrong or even it only sounded wrong, I'll apologize, and he knows it. But this behaviour can not be seen from him. And I am pretty sure that he has done some wrong statements, for which he should apologize. Can you see me making statements without some proofs? I guess not. I *am* a man of honour and of logics, so I expect that from others, as well. Unfortunately it is not the case everytime. I can understand, if someone has problems with logics, but if someone is "hinterhältig" (what is the English term? double moral? I dunno), it plainly makes me mad.

This has nothing to do with him being a competititor. I would have attacked him at the same level, if he would be Doom9 or anyone else, making such statements. I just don't attack anybody out of selfish feelings. The problem, as I can see it, he seems to have a problem with me as competitor, so it is not a plain coincidence, after all. :rolleyes:

On the one hand you are right, it is a bit stupid that two guys do the same, thats why I asked him to concentrate on the low-level dlls, as he seems to be the faster an better coder, and on HeadAC3he is simply faster.

On the other hand you are wrong, as only with the emerge of BeSweet I invested more time in HeadAC3he, so it is good that soemone else is doing "the same thing". So the best would be, if he did both. Make BeSweet better and make the dlls better, as I don't think as I am capable of doing second. Nevertheless stressing on the second (the dlls) would be better for the community, I think.

I hope you c that I am real, knowing what I can do and what I can't (or don't think so because of lack of knowledge or time) and giving everyone the credits (s)he deserves.

I like peace and harmony, but on the same time I'll defend myself to the utmost if I feel and know to be treated unjustified.:mad:

But perhaps you could help him to prove me wrong and try to show me where I was ungrateful or alike. (If you can't break one side, tra the other...) There is still the possibility of me being wrong, but I am pretty sure, I am not.

Still, I have no hate for him, but it could change, if he remains stubburn and/or won't apologize. I am still looking forward to ending this s### and going to normal business, as I wanted to do it some posts prior...

[dvd2svcd]

Sorry, but I don't see how or why he should apologize in any way. I'm fully behind DSPguru. I would think it should be the other way around, and I do think you should be much more grateful for all he has done for you and th cummunity all together. I have seen a couple of threads with you and DSPguru, and always you have belittled BeSweet. To me it feels like you're jealous that DSPguru actually came up behind and surpassed you with a much more versatile system. And now you can't do anything but barf at him, although he has helped you. Besides, anybody can optimize a compiler.

Besides, you're much more propriatory than DSPguru. I remember once you send me your software, but you also said that I wasn't allowed to put it in my software bundle. Weird.

[DarkAvenger]

I have seen a couple of threads with you and DSPguru, and always you have belittled BeSweet.

Then what have I said? This no proof. I said, HeadAC3he is faster, and that is all. He says BeSweet has more functionality. True, as well. So what's wrong? So instead of useless statement make a quote, *how* I should have betitled BeSweet (wrongfully?).

To me it feels like you're jealous that DSPguru actually came up behind and surpassed you with a much more versatile system.

This is the the easiest reson one can think of and nevertheless not true. "surpassing" is a matter of definiton. It is not so hard to implement a lot of function without proper buffering. Of course it is not too easy as well. So he had my respect for getting BeSweet stuffed. That has nothing to do with jealosy, cos HeadAC3he is still (and probably will) more efficient, which was my main target. See, I don't care for most functions of BeSweet, so I won't include it. I have other things to do with my time. It doesn't need a DSPGuru to make a tool which uses all kinds of dlls. (See, can do it, as well, without even being a good coder?) But making the dlls better is a harder task and for that you need a better coder - maybe like DG.

Furthermore I don't inlcuded mp3 output, as the dll is not based on toolame. DG states he uses "2lame". If he refers to toolame, he lies. I told him better to correct it, just to be precise, but he didn't change. So...

Of course, it is your freedom to say which tool is better for you, nothing against it.

And now you can't do anything but barf at him, although he has helped you.

Well, please reread the thread before making inprecise statements. He says something without any proof or anything, and I always give reason for my statements. So what to think of?

BTW, I could easily say that you are biased anyway as you are using BeSweet, so he probably helped you a lot. (It is the same level as saying that I am jealous, jealous for what? :rolleyes: )

I am just asking for objectivity. Do you think just by helping me, I'll keep my mouth shut if he does something wrong? I am not "buyable" that easily. That's what I meant he shouldn't take it personal when he is criticized.

Besides, anybody can optimize a compiler.

YOu probably mean "configuring". Don't be too sure about it. If it was so, we would have a lot of less bloated downloads. But this is not the point. He said in the meaning of I never helped himm which is untrue, so I gave an example to stress this.

Besides, you're much more propriatory than DSPguru. I remember once you send me your software, but you also said that I wasn't allowed to put it in my software bundle. Weird.

This is my freedom to decide, how I want my soft to be distributed. I don't know you and I don't know how fast you would update your download pack. So if I simply don't allow you to put in HeadAC3he, people have to dl HeadAc3he from my site and thus get the latest and less buggy version. Very logical, isn't it? Furthermore you didn't reply to the mail, so I haven't had the best impression of you, as well.

Please define propriatory. Am I using a format which is uncommon? You probably refer to CLI. I did it on purpose.

So if you want to be constructive, please negate my statements by logics anmd/or proofs and not by general talk.:p Adn instead of only seeing one side, why don't you try to proove my side? You will find it hard to contradict anything I said against DG or his behaviour.

It is not against his soft, it is against him.

[DarkAvenger]

This will probably my vebry last post for this thread - unless someone comes up with a post, which is *not* in the "yada-yada-yada" style, to quote someone...

Two things came to my mind:

1) Yealousy
How can I proove it is not such a primitive motivation, as some others might think of first? Well, it is kinda hard to proove how someone feels, but I might just show why I just don't care too much about BeSweet. The problem with this is that some people could think I want to disgrace it - which is not the case. It is just about, how would I make a program stressing on a lot of funct. considering in- and output formats and not on speed: Well, the core/hardest part would be designing a queue in C++, which stores the data of the various outputs of the dlls. Of course it has to be compatible which each dll's iput, thus it must return a pointer to continous mem. But making a queue in C++ is something you learn in the second semester, so making this queue won't be taking too much time, though it is more compilcated, as well. So having done is, the next (more or less) hard step is too uunderstand each dll's interface. Then you basically add hd i/o and go like this (eg on ac3->wav->ssrc->mp3):
a) Fill up ac3 queue
b) decode frames till wav queue is full, erase processed mem of ac3 queue
c) fill it up again (basically a))
d) feed data of wav queue to ssrc queue, erase processed mem of wav queue
e) fill it up (basically b) -> c) -> a))
... and so on till mp3 queue is full or you directly write to hd.

This is basically the way to easily design a programme for which it is easy to add future formats. The negative side of using object-oriented programming is speed. So you loose speed, and htis is not what counts for *me*. Furthermore I am not too much interested in the details of coding as such. For me the theoretical background is more important. Thats why I do "dirty" hardcaore programming aimed for maximum speed *without* loosing quality. So I am thinking hard how this could be achived, had some ideas and implemented it, and it does work very speedy. (In fact, I want to enhance buffering speed even more, which will be even harder to accomplish, but this is what interests me.) The downside is of course, it is always a major pain in the ass to add something new. So this is the main reason, why I am not jealous on BeSweet - though I dunno how it has exactly been coded. I know I could do it, since the idea behind it is simple, and so why should I be jealous? I rather think that someone else might be jealous... I don't want to say HeadAC3he is somethng better, but I think not too many people will be able to make programs work that efficiently like me - without even being a good coder. And that's what makes me proud. Of course, DG can be proud of his creations as well, not that someone understands me the wrong way. It is just a matter of personal attitude.
So it is up to the user to decide what he likes, and what not and finally which program (s)he uses. I don't mind if 90% were using BeSweet and 10% HeadAC3he? Why should I?

2) Gratefulness
Before someone understands me wrong because of the following sentences, I say it once again, I always was thankful for DG's work and showed it, AFAIK. But in fact, do I have to show him any *special* thankfulness? I mean, he did not improve eg. the lame.dll for me or on my order. He did it for making BeSweet producing better output and thus for the community. So why should it be something unmoral to integrate the better functionality into HeadAC3he? Why should I be thankful, when I personally have nothing from it? I don't use mp3, at all. Nevertheless I am thankful, so I credited DG in whatsnew.txt. My program as such didn't get beetter, it was *his* improvements which made the output better. So in fact the *community* should be thankful to him, not mainly me. The other thing is with the help. Of course for help I was thankful and I am pretty sure I did write it explicitly sometimes. After a while - while not loosing your thankfulness, you loose up the style of writing and it is natural that you don't write everytime thx in the email, after having changed a dozen. Then you expect that the other one should know that one is thankful, at least when the other one would be real, as well. Nevertheless one should not forget that there is only a need to ask for help (at least in my case), when stuff is not documented well or at all.

So I guess this was everything. BTW, I came to a funny idea which might be a "perfect" intermediate solution, wwwhich unfortunately for the community probably won't happen: As DG wants to make a BeSweet.dll, the solution would be that HeadAC3he integrates it, so it gets its functionality, has a GUI and is faster than BeSweet will ever be (unless serious buffering is implemented). But I don't think DG likes the idea, nor have I interest for it - for aparent reasons.


@DG

So I took a look into the source and I am pretty sure the mods for my need won't be too hard. Furthermore I saw that either you planned to make them, as well, or had it an exerimental stadium and took it out again... :rolleyes:

[Okar Gona]

@darkavenger
I find it a pity you spend so many times arguing who said what and when. Instead I hope you‘ll use that time in the future on improving your program.

Remember all of you out there the MPAA and M$soft would love to see the coders of the free world to fight each other…

[int 21h]

Originally posted by dvd2svcd
Sorry, but I don't see how or why he should apologize in any way. I'm fully behind DSPguru. I would think it should be the other way around, and I do think you should be much more grateful for all he has done for you and th cummunity all together. I have seen a couple of threads with you and DSPguru, and always you have belittled BeSweet. To me it feels like you're jealous that DSPguru actually came up behind and surpassed you with a much more versatile system. And now you can't do anything but barf at him, although he has helped you. Besides, anybody can optimize a compiler.

Besides, you're much more propriatory than DSPguru. I remember once you send me your software, but you also said that I wasn't allowed to put it in my software bundle. Weird.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Your software also blatantly disreguards the GPL. vStrip is GPL, yet you're using it in a closed source application. The following also applies to any other GPL software in use in your program.


3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it,
under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of
Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:

a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections
1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,

b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three
years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your
cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete
machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be
distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium
customarily used for software interchange; or,

c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer
to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is
allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you
received the program in object code or executable form with such
an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)


Perhaps you should read the license.txt files that accompany the software that you use.

[Doom9]

I don't think calls to a GPL exe violate anything. and I any case.. only the author can enfore copyright and I don't see maven doing anything. Actually I just fired off an email in his direction asking for clarification. Other than vstrip and besweet I see nothing problematic in the dvd2svcd package (okay, there's avisynth but that's a separate issue.. a fully compliant version of it should be out shortly).

[int 21h]

In any event, I don't have the time to sit here and argue about goofy GPL rights and wrongs, and I will avoid doing so in the future.

[DarkAvenger]

@Okar GOne

Yeah, that's why I won't argue any further, because I did it sufficiently.

@int 21h and Doom9

So if one does not keep to the rulez, I need not to do it, as well, I think, so hello toolame.dll....

[Doom9]

@da: then say hello to being flamed.. not by myself but by others.

you got the ssrc.dll source.. what more are you asking for? dspguru says he got mavens blessing for vstrip.dll so I believe that but just in case I asked maven about the license situation for that dll but I haven't got any answer yet. as for mp2enc.dll.. it's removed from dspgurus package plus I saw the mail he wrote to the author trying to find a solution.

you can twist it and turn it all you want but unless dspguru lied about vstrip.dll that effectively clears him. It may have taken a while but the fact of the matter is it has happened. Don't forget that it's not Richard Stallman, the eff or any other GNU organization has any rights over software released under the *GPL license.. the rights remain with the authors and only they can chose to take legal action. So, the normal way to deal with such a situation would be to contact the author and mention that there's a violation... he can still have the gnu foundation look after his rights but the author must be the initiating person.

[DarkAvenger]

Good, as well. Then I'll ask each author of GPL soft for personal license. Sounds stupid to me (because it it not fair, if one is allowed and done not, but if the author doesn't care, why not directly choosing LGPL?), but if it works...

[Doom9]

I'm not saying making exceptions makes much sense... actually I will try to convince maven to release the dll under the LGPL so it can be used in other apps without any further exceptions and such stuff.

have you asked the toolame developers about the possibility of releasing a dll under the LGPL yet?

I think this thread is pretty illustrating why many software companies don't like open source at all... the GPL is too strict and many companies have to develop their own solutions for a problem already solved just because the GPL code cannot be used. And the FSF even discourages the use of the LGPL even though that would make such integrations possible without much friction potential.

[DarkAvenger]

ACK

I have written a mail to Mike Cheng, but no response yet...

[MaTTeR]

Hmmm...went through all 3 pages of the post and still missed the point to the post other than people flaming each other:D

I hope this is settled now and we can all move on to more productive ideas. What is this sudden push of toolame all about anyway? Are there really that many people encoding to SVCD? Perhaps I need to look into it.

[user]

Hi,

yes, because SVCD is a very interesting formate.

It is played by a lot of stand alone DVDplayers. Divx not.

PC in living room is for a lot of wives not acceptable...


And please do not argue about bad quality of SVCD...


Very useful high quality SVCDs are made as following:

Eg.:

minimum bitrate video only 1000 kbit/s
max. bitrate 3500

average bitrate 1800 up to 2200 for whole movie is enough !!!

then adding audio streams, eg. 2, and they have to be in mp2 ... toolame...

They are a little bit off standard (bitrate peaks higher than about 2600), but even VBR is SVCD-standard compliant.

Until there are easier and cheaper ways to create miniDVD (same mpeg2 video stream as described above, but multiplexed with original AC3 stream....) than at the moment, mp2/toolame is very useful.

Those miniDVds are played well, too, by a lot stand alone DVDplayers, but a lot work to do (or is there a freeware method for creating them ?).

[int 21h]

WTF?

Originally posted by user
Hi,

yes, because SVCD is a very interesting formate.

It is played by a lot of stand alone DVDplayers. Divx not.

PC in living room is for a lot of wives not acceptable...


And please do not argue about bad quality of SVCD...


Very useful high quality SVCDs are made as following:

Eg.:

minimum bitrate video only 1000 kbit/s
max. bitrate 3500

average bitrate 1800 up to 2200 for whole movie is enough !!!

then adding audio streams, eg. 2, and they have to be in mp2 ... toolame...

They are a little bit off standard (bitrate peaks higher than about 2600), but even VBR is SVCD-standard compliant.

Until there are easier and cheaper ways to create miniDVD (same mpeg2 video stream as described above, but multiplexed with original AC3 stream....) than at the moment, mp2/toolame is very useful.

Those miniDVds are played well, too, by a lot stand alone DVDplayers, but a lot work to do (or is there a freeware method for creating them ?).

[Ookami]

Brrr... This is, sadly, reminding me of the politics in the MP3 scene!

[maven]

i never gave DSPguru (or anyone else for that matter) a seperate license for vStrip (which is GPL as well as the dll). i asked him to publish the source, he said no (for now).

nevertheless, i helped find his way around the code...
whether or not not publishing his sources is breaking the GPL (i think it is) is a matter of interpretation, but that does not mean i hate him...

[DarkAvenger]

qed.

[-h]

Ugly.

I'm not sure a public forum is the best place to resolve something like this.

-h

[DSPguru]

Originally posted by maven
i never gave DSPguru (or anyone else for that matter) a seperate license for vStrip (which is GPL as well as the dll). i asked him to publish the source, he said no (for now). you asked me to publish the code, i said that BeSweet's code is closed, and i haven't decide about its' future. i also said i hope that this issue won't lead to a veto from your side, and it didn't.

nevertheless, i helped find his way around the code...exactly, you helped me and made the integration of vStrip into BeSweet a quick task.
whether or not not publishing his sources is breaking the GPL (i think it is) is a matter of interpretation, but that does not mean i hate him... why should you hate me in the first place ? i believe we had a very good cooperation :).
obviously, the only one from all the posters here that hates me is DA, as he wrote : Originally posted by DarkAvenger
It is not against his soft, it is against him.
and i already said that i won't react, and let the users judge for themselves.
in fact, judging by all the PMs i got since this whole thing started, my side is well understood.



now, here is the reply i got from the author of mp2enc.dll :D :
Hello,
Sure, no problem to use it for your application, if I have some spare time I
will update the headers and release the entire DLL under the LGPL license.
Albert

and that's another example of the way BeSweet contribute to the divx community :).

[MaTTeR]

Ok sounds like this has been resolved<sigh>. Perhaps a mod can close the thread now?:D

[DarkAvenger]

ly, the only one from all the posters here that hates me is DA

I think I made it pretty clear, why I no more trust you.

[user]

int 21h:
"Re: SVCD rulez !
WTF?
"


Ookami:
" Brrr... This is, sadly, reminding me of the politics in the MP3 scene! "


mmm, I don't understand those two replies to my SVCD message.

What is the meaning of "WTF?" ?

Is Ookamis reply related to my SVCD message or in general to this thread ?


MaTTeR:
"What is this sudden push of toolame all about anyway? Are there really that many people encoding to SVCD? Perhaps I need to look into it."

My long praying the good features of SVCD/DSVCD was a reply to the question above by MaTTeR.
I just wanted to encourage him to continue good work on toolame/mp2.

[maven]

you asked me to publish the code, i said that BeSweet's code is closed, and i haven't decide about its' future. i also said i hope that this issue won't lead to a veto from your side, and it didn't.


me not "vetoing" means that vStrip is still under the license it has always been - the GPL...

[DarkAvenger]

If I understand maven correctly, he still insist that it is GPL with all consequences. But he is just too nice to make pressure while some just ignore it. So will play the bad cop, again. :devil: BTW, I would like to see vstrip LGPL, as well. But I guess you have your reasons.

[Ookami]

I meant the thread in general. And I don't want to post in this thread anymore, as it would be only more thread drifting.

Originally posted by user
int 21h:
"Re: SVCD rulez !
WTF?
"
Ookami:
" Brrr... This is, sadly, reminding me of the politics in the MP3 scene! "

mmm, I don't understand those two replies to my SVCD message.

What is the meaning of "WTF?" ?

Is Ookamis reply related to my SVCD message or in general to this thread ?

[DarkAvenger]

Any update? Or is DG still happily violating licenses? (I didn't dl latest releases, so I dunno). Quite a shame, if it would be still like this...