Brian Kerrick Nickel brian.nickel at
Sun Jul 23 01:35:56 CEST 2006

Because there appear to be problems with extending the FrameFactory, an
approach similar to the FileTypeResolver code could be added to the
FrameFactory so support for new frame types could be inserted into the
default instance.


On 7/19/06, Scott Wheeler <wheeler at> wrote:
> Heya folks --
> As mentioned, I want to do a 1.5 release relatively soon and as of today
> my
> internet connection is back.  I've been looking over the mailing list
> archives trying to put together a TODO list of issues to look at before a
> release.  Since it's been a while since the last release, I'm sure that
> I've
> missed some.  Here are the topics that I've currently flagged:
> - package config file for c bindings only?
> - [patch] tbytevector::find() bug with unicode?
> - WavPack
> - Re: [taglib] lyrics support
> - Speex tag support in taglib
> - Re: Weird genre problem with taglib
> - Calculation of MPEG frame length is wrong
> - GEOB frames (was Re: extending taglib (ID3v2 frames))
> - Re: Odd APIC frame
> - wrong TDAT conversion
> Additionally there's the topic of the Windows port which has about a dozen
> threads.  I'll send a follow up mail on that topic in just a minute.  (I
> just
> want to keep the threads separate.)
> - If I missed your issue in the list above, please respond in this thread
> - If you reported a bug, whether it's in the list above or not, please put
> it
> in the bug tracking system.  It's somewhat more reliable than my brain.
> - If you sent a patch to support a new format I'd like to (in this thread)
> hear what you've done in terms of testing (especially writing).  Make sure
> that files still playback.  If there's a tool for reporting info for your
> format (i.e. ogginfo) please test with that.  Also consider doing a
> byte-for-byte comparison with reference implementations.  People naturally
> get pissed off when their files get corrupted.  (And for that reason some
> of
> the new format stuff may not make it into 1.5 if I'm not fairly convinced
> that it's ready.)
> - There are a lot of bindings for TagLib now.  Some of them (i.e. Dong
> Xu's
> for Perl) probably get more visibility in the current place (in this case
> CPAN) than they would being distributed with TagLib.  However, I'm willing
> to
> consider distributing additional bindings with the library.  If you're
> interested in getting your bindings in please respond here too.  Languages
> that I'm not very comfortable in (Ok, so that mostly means everything
> that's
> not C, C++ or Perl, so almost all of the new bindings.) I'd like to ask
> other
> developers that are comfortable in those languages to review the APIs
> before
> inclusion in TagLib.  If it's your first API to write in that language,
> say
> so.  Also keep future compatibility in mind.  You're stuck with any
> included
> APIs until TagLib 2.0.
> - Don't post feature requests without code (in this thread).
> Thanks people!
> -Scott
> --
> Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so.
> --Bertrand Russell
> _______________________________________________
> taglib-devel mailing list
> taglib-devel at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the taglib-devel mailing list