Hi, I had found a Opus TODO list in https://wiki.xiph.org/index.php?title=OpusTodo&mobileaction=toggle_view_desktop . The item "Opus-tools" interest me. And here is my question about "Port opusdec to libopusfile/libopusurl": 1. Does this function have achieved? On one hand, I think not literally. On the other hand, after briefly reviewing opusdec.c of opus-tools, I found that opusdec can decode by calling libopusfile's decode function. So does the function "opusdec" have been realized? 2. If the answer of Question 1 is "no", what is its specific requirement? what can I do for the community? By the way, I don't know if the opus developers still use the opus mailing list. Any answer or suggestion would be appreciated. Thank you -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/opus/attachments/20190827/2672c244/attachment.html>
On 2019-08-27 8:15 a.m., 陈伟旭 wrote:> I had found a Opus TODO list in > https://wiki.xiph.org/index.php?title=OpusTodo > > The item "Opus-tools" interest me. And here is my question about "Port > opusdec to libopusfile/libopusurl":It looks like this was done a couple of years ago, primarily in commit e9bbfacf0a1bbade70005fa730cc50e838baaa32, and part of the 0.2 release. I don't know if there's any useful follow-up work to be done. If you're interested in working on opus-tools, there are some outstanding PRs, and opusrtp is the weakest of the tools; I think the todo list in the wiki is accurate for it. Cheers, -r -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/opus/attachments/20190827/4f81542d/attachment.sig>
<div id="contentDescription"
style="line-height:1.5;text-align:justify;text-justify:inter-ideograph">
<div>Thanks to your
reply.</div><div><br></div><div>So part of the
wiki is out of date? Beside Opus-tools, I also concern about the spec,
optimization and future work in wiki. Could you tell me about if they are out of
date?</div>
<div class="NETEASEMAILMASTERLOCALSIGNATURE"
contenteditable="false">
<div id="imail_signature"></div>
</div>
<div class="J-reply"
style="background-color:#f2f2f2;color:black;padding-top:6px;padding-bottom:6px;border-radius:3px;-moz-border-radius:3px;-webkit-border-radius:3px;margin-top:45px;margin-bottom:20px;"><div
style="font-size:14px;line-height:1.5;word-break:break-all;margin-left:10px;margin-right:10px">On
<span class="mail-date">08/28/2019 00:08</span>, <a
class="mail-to" style="text-decoration:none;color:#2a97ff;"
href="mailto:giles@thaumas.net">Ralph Giles</a> wrote:
</div></div><blockquote id="ntes-iosmail-quote"
style="margin:0">On 2019-08-27 8:15 a.m., 陈伟旭 wrote:
<br>
<br>> I had found a Opus TODO list in
<br>> https://wiki.xiph.org/index.php?title=OpusTodo
<br>>
<br>> The item "Opus-tools" interest me. And here is my
question about "Port
<br>> opusdec to libopusfile/libopusurl":
<br>
<br>It looks like this was done a couple of years ago, primarily in commit
<br>e9bbfacf0a1bbade70005fa730cc50e838baaa32, and part of the 0.2 release.
<br>I don't know if there's any useful follow-up work to be done.
<br>
<br>If you're interested in working on opus-tools, there are some
<br>outstanding PRs, and opusrtp is the weakest of the tools; I think the
<br>todo list in the wiki is accurate for it.
<br>
<br>Cheers,
<br> -r
<br>
<br>
<br>_______________________________________________
<br>opus mailing list
<br>opus@xiph.org
<br>http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/opus
<br></blockquote>
</div>
陈伟旭 wrote:> So part of the wiki is out of date? Beside Opus-tools, I also concern > about the spec, optimization and future work in wiki. Could you tell me > about if they are out of date? > On 08/28/2019 00:08, Ralph Giles <mailto:giles at thaumas.net> wrote:For the Spec section: There is a Matroska mapping, and it has been implemented in Firefox and FFmpeg (and Chrome and others). There is an ongoing effort to formally standardize Matroska in the CELLAR working group at the IETF. I am not certain that much attention has been paid to Opus specifically during that process, so contributions there might be welcome. See the working group's status page [1] and mailing list [2] for more information. There is still no multichannel RTP mapping for Opus. At the last IETF meeting in Montreal there seemed to be some interest in an effort to finally make one, but I'm not aware of anyone who has started working on or published a draft yet. The MP4 mapping is currently maintained by the original author at [3]. There has been some discussion of more formal publication through DASH-IF or similar, but I don't think that has gone anywhere yet. This has also been implemented in a number of places (Firefox, Chrome, L-SMASH, GPAC, FFmpeg, etc.). A notable gap here is for someone to look at the changes (if any) needed for Ambisonics support [4]. [1] https://tools.ietf.org/wg/cellar/ [2] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cellar [3] https://github.com/VFR-maniac/Mp4Opus [4] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8486 I will leave Jean-Marc to comment on the Optimization and Future Work sections. I know at least some of those things have been worked on.
Ralph Giles wrote:> It looks like this was done a couple of years ago, primarily in commit > e9bbfacf0a1bbade70005fa730cc50e838baaa32, and part of the 0.2 release. > I don't know if there's any useful follow-up work to be done.I think the biggest gap at the moment is the ability to edit metadata (i.e., the Opus equivalent of something like vorbiscomment from vorbis-tools).