> The current homepage is http://www.xiph.org/cvs.html ... this is > supposed to change eventually, but there are some weird problems with > icecast.org that i don't quite understand. :) > > Anyways, do NOT check out icecast2 from icecast.org CVS, it is very > outdated. Instead, check out the 'icecast' module from anoncvs@xiph.org. > > MoritzSorry... joining in on this discussion late.... I for one rarely use cvs to check out software unless I am planning on beta testing or developing for it. The fact that no release packages are available signifies to me that icecast2 is not yet ready for prime time. This is not meant to be a criticism with anything about icecast2, as I haven't used it, merely that it should not be treated as if it is released until it is released, and icecast1 should not be treated as obsolete until icecast2 is released. (BTW, I had this same argument for alsa, which has 'deprecated' its previous version in favor of its development version, and no longer supports the 0.5x versions-- you don't see this kind of stuff with the linux kernel). Personally, I feel that the developers will be losing a lot of potential beta testers (even other volunteers) for icecast2 when none of the icecast.org website refers to icecast2 at all. I understand there were some problems accessing the site, but if those are now resolved, there's no reason for someone to go and at least put a quick word in. Furthermore, since icecast2 is not released yet, IMO it is premature to disable the icecast1-compatible directory server (especially without any kind of warning). I will continue to use icecast1, for all of its faults until icecast2 appears to be, if not a mature project, then at least a project which has given birth. The fact that there are ever only 15 icecast servers listed in the directory now, versus many times that previously, should give the server maintainers some pause in continuing a non-icecast1 compatible server. Obviously I am not the only one sticking with icecast1 at present. I guess the question comes down to how one wishes to balance the user community against the developer community. -- prothonotar at tarnation.dyndns.org "Every man is a mob, a chain gang of idiots." - Jonathan Nolan, /Momento Mori/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: part Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 593 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/icecast/attachments/20021228/86c1f385/part.pgp
Aaron Gaudio wrote:> or developing for it. The fact that no release packages are available > signifies to me that icecast2 is not yet ready for prime time. ThisWell, there are, see Geoff's mail ... those are official. Multiple problems of pretty much any kind prevented Xiph.org from getting icecast.org in order; I don't know much about them, but the fact that icecast.org is *really* in bad shape, its CVS is outdated, no mention of Icecast2 as you said, like the missing Alpha release.. all this shows that there must be something majorly b0rk3n. ;P ... and there's only that much time they have to fix time intense things that have nothing to do with what they want/we expect them to do - develop. What I'm trying to say, those problems are webserver related. Icecast2 alpha was finished already months ago, and even before that it's been in quite some wide production use already. Icecast2 is a stable program. The most prominent example would surely be the BBC Vorbis streams. If you're waiting for a 2.0 release (not alpha, not beta), well, your loss. Icecast2 worked great for my little fun games for something like 1.5 years now (no, I don't have a 100 MBit line at my disposal ;P). Apparently there are only a few minor features missing, and considering its stability I believe a potential beta phase wouldn't last long.> is not meant to be a criticism with anything about icecast2, as I > haven't used it, merely that it should not be treated as if it is > released until it is released, and icecast1 should not be treated as > obsolete until icecast2 is released. (BTW, I had this same argumentIt *is* released, but people can't get it besides from Mike's inofficial place, Xiph.org CVS and Oddsock's win32 port on oddsock.org. That's the whole issue, not Icecast2 being not where I pretend it to be. I suggest you give it a try. Streaming Vorbis is fun. If you happen have tools like libtool, automake/-conf et al installed, getting it from CVS is really no big deal and no different than installing from a release tarball.> Furthermore, since icecast2 is not released yet, IMO it is premature > to disable the icecast1-compatible directory server (especially > without any kind of warning). I will continue to use icecast1, for > all of its faults until icecast2 appears to be, if not a mature > project, then at least a project which has given birth. The fact thatUh, does any directory server still work? The Shoutcast people didn't want Icecast servers announced in their directories anymore for quite some time now, iirc, and given the shape of icecast.org, every "normal" directory servers there might simply be broken over time. ;P <p>Moritz --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.
On Sat, 28 Dec 2002, Geoff Shang wrote: | IMHO, the fact that icecast 1.x only supports MP3 and not ogg vorbis makes | it obsolete. Thanks for, in effect, telling the people who still reply on icecast1 that they're useless. As that would make us put a lot of faith in icecast 2. You people need to get over your "If it isnt ogg, it's shit" mentality. Ogg itself is barely a few months old, and the Vorbis people seems to think that since then, EVERYONE has re-encoded their massive MP3 archives into Ogg. It makes me wonder what the color of the sky is in their universe. I'll put forth a theory here for everyone to chew on: Broadcasters wont convert their content to Ogg because the streaming server (icecast2) it goes through currently fails to support the features they are used to. And who would pin their operation on alpha-level code where on average the last commit was 5-6 MONTHS ago!? Vorbis has actually abandoned TWO things here: Their Icecast 1.x users, and the icecast 2 project. At least, that's the impression once can gain from just looking in from the outside. Perhaps instead of asking for people to write docs, Vorbis should be asking for vollunteers who actually care. I care, that's why I wrote this. /dale --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.
Behold, gtgbr@gmx.net hath decreed:> Aaron Gaudio wrote: > > or developing for it. The fact that no release packages are available > > signifies to me that icecast2 is not yet ready for prime time. This > > Well, there are, see Geoff's mail ... those are official. Multiple > problems of pretty much any kind prevented Xiph.org from getting > icecast.org in order; I don't know much about them, but the fact that > icecast.org is *really* in bad shape, its CVS is outdated, no mention of > Icecast2 as you said, like the missing Alpha release.. all this shows > that there must be something majorly b0rk3n. ;P ... and there's only > that much time they have to fix time intense things that have nothing to > do with what they want/we expect them to do - develop.If icecast.org is so broken, then someone ought to do what was suggested on the list in November (looking through the archives): put it out of its misery. Why are there no "official" releases? Are you saying no one (say, an official maintainer, for which that would be one of his/her functions) is willing to put them together and stuff them somewhere on xiph.org or sourceforge.net or some other distribution channel that is available and visible? Is there a maintainer for this project (I mean that seriously, I'm not really familiar with the development effort)?> > What I'm trying to say, those problems are webserver related. Icecast2 > alpha was finished already months ago, and even before that it's been in > quite some wide production use already. Icecast2 is a stable program. > The most prominent example would surely be the BBC Vorbis streams.That may be, but if the only "official" source I have to retrieve it from is CVS, then it is not ready for prime time, no matter what its stability may or may not be. First of all, grabbing the latest CVS version means I will be getting every little (untested) change that has been put into CVS. If there are labels for "official" released versions, then I don't know about them... why? because there's no documentation of what to actually get from CVS. Wine has CVS versions... one usually downloads a CVS snapshot (or RPM made from a CVS snapshot)... wine was "stable" (if not "complete") for quite a long time, but they never called it released until 1.0 came out.> > If you're waiting for a 2.0 release (not alpha, not beta), well, your > loss. Icecast2 worked great for my little fun games for something like > 1.5 years now (no, I don't have a 100 MBit line at my disposal ;P). > Apparently there are only a few minor features missing, and considering > its stability I believe a potential beta phase wouldn't last long.The problem is, without having enough people running it, such stories are allegorical. And there cannot be many people running it, judging from the lack of servers listed in the icecast.org directory server (unless everyone just suddenly became shy).> > > is not meant to be a criticism with anything about icecast2, as I > > haven't used it, merely that it should not be treated as if it is > > released until it is released, and icecast1 should not be treated as > > obsolete until icecast2 is released. (BTW, I had this same argument > > It *is* released, but people can't get it besides from Mike's inofficial > place, Xiph.org CVS and Oddsock's win32 port on oddsock.org. That's the > whole issue, not Icecast2 being not where I pretend it to be.Then it is not released, just available. It's like saying "Doom 3 *is* released, but people can't get it besides from the unofficial alpha available on Gnutella". Maybe it is just a maintenance problem- maybe someone just needs to grab the icecast2 X.XX version label from CVS, make a tarball and put it up on a website. That's still part of releasing a project (free software or not), and without such maintenance effort, the project will appear to most as not ready for use. Is this a TODO item? Is there a "stable version" label on icecast2 (other than HEAD)? I can try putting together a package in my spare time and sticking it online somewhere.> > I suggest you give it a try. Streaming Vorbis is fun. If you happen have > tools like libtool, automake/-conf et al installed, getting it from CVS > is really no big deal and no different than installing from a release > tarball.I'm not all that interested in streaming vorbis at this time, because I have more mp3s than I do oggs. It's simpler for me to stream mp3s. Does icecast2 only stream vorbis? If that's the case, then icecast1 will never be obsolete so long as people want to stream mp3s (without reencoding to ogg-- which introduces more loss into the stream). From my little understanding of what exactly icecast2 does (hobbled together from searches through the list archives, since there is no useful webpage information).> > > Furthermore, since icecast2 is not released yet, IMO it is premature > > to disable the icecast1-compatible directory server (especially > > without any kind of warning). I will continue to use icecast1, for > > all of its faults until icecast2 appears to be, if not a mature > > project, then at least a project which has given birth. The fact that > > Uh, does any directory server still work? The Shoutcast people didn't > want Icecast servers announced in their directories anymore for quite > some time now, iirc, and given the shape of icecast.org, every "normal" > directory servers there might simply be broken over time. ;Pyp.mp3.de still works, although it does not display as much detail on each stream as yp.icecast.org does (did). That, and I don't speak German. :) -- prothonotar at tarnation.dyndns.org "Every man is a mob, a chain gang of idiots." - Jonathan Nolan, /Momento Mori/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: part Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 593 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/icecast/attachments/20021228/958e8b3a/part.pgp
On Sat, 28 Dec 2002, Aaron Gaudio wrote:> The fact that no release packages are available > signifies to me that icecast2 is not yet ready for prime time.There are pre-release packages at http://www.xiph.org/~msmith/ but CVS is more mature than these.> icecast1 should not be treated as > obsolete until icecast2 is released.IMHO, the fact that icecast 1.x only supports MP3 and not ogg vorbis makes it obsolete. Geoff. <p>--- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.
Behold, Geoff Shang <gshang@uq.net.au> hath decreed:> > IMHO, the fact that icecast 1.x only supports MP3 and not ogg vorbis makes > it obsolete. >How is that? Adding a feature to a later version does not make the earlier version obsolete, especially when the later version has not yet been released. Linux 2.5 has a bunch of new features that 2.4 doesn't have. Does that mean 2.4 is obsolete? Does it mean Linus shouldn't release any more patches for 2.4 because it takes up time from 2.5? Does it mean developers should refuse to discuss any issues with 2.4? -- prothonotar at tarnation.dyndns.org "Every man is a mob, a chain gang of idiots." - Jonathan Nolan, /Momento Mori/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: part Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 593 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/icecast/attachments/20021228/7eda9de9/part.pgp