[mythtv] MythUI OSD branch and the way forward

Michael T. Dean mtdean at thirdcontact.com
Tue Mar 23 04:30:57 UTC 2010


On 03/23/2010 12:14 AM, Robert McNamara wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:04 PM, Mark Kendall wrote:
>    
>> Hopefully that's all sufficiently clear. If not, I'll crawl back into
>> my hole and brood on it some more:) In case it isn't obvious, I'd like
>> to move to option 6 as soon as possible - but it's not my decision and
>> I've spent so long working on it that I may have overlooked the
>> obvious...
>>      
> I am all for your approach of option 6.  I don't know if this will
> ease any tensions or confusions that might arise in reading this, but
> some of the arguments for this approach in my mind are:
>
> * It allows for some extremely fancy UI integration with video,
> unlocking potential UI capabilities people have often wished for in
> Myth.
> * It is the same approach that is used across a wide variety of
> hardware by XBMC and Boxee, which also do their rendering in GL.
> * Simpler maintenance of the video output code.
>
> The work you have done on the OSD branch is enormous and In my
> (admittedly biased) opinion, I think that it's better to "measure
> twice and cut once" as my mother would say-- do it right the first
> time.  Thanks for all you done, I say "go for it."
>    

Agreed.  I like option 6--ideally, the first option 6 you mentioned 
("Option 6 - Drop XVideo/XvMC support and standardise around OpenGL," 
and not the second, "Option 6 - Drop support in stages" :).

Also--keeping in mind that I make no promises here (and am /definitely/ 
not making promises for Mark)--didn't I hear mention that the 
OpenGL-only approach would likely be workable on all NVIDIA GF6x00 cards 
and above?  (Just to give readers an idea of what kind of hardware we're 
talking about here--hardly top-of-the-line stuff.)

Mike


More information about the mythtv-dev mailing list