What do you think about it? Both devs and usersÄoesn't TagLib write to ID3v2.4 only? If yes, changing the library from id3lib to TagLib makes no sense since ID3v2.3 is a LOT more wide-spread than ID3v2.4. This will become more and more an hindrance to this wonderful product, if not handled ASAP imho. I mean: better to start recoding today, than to improve and improve mp3tag around a old-and-dead library that promise no improvements or bug fixes, and may become incompatible with the new standards as they come (in fact, it has already happened, we are just lucky 2.4 hasn't get widespread attention yet, but with iTunes which is 2.4 focused, things will change quickly I think). but mine is only a suggestion, especially since id3lib is dead stuff nowadays (and has been in the last 2 years as well it seems) and we can't expect ANY improvement from it. why not give it a try? I mean: I know it's no easy work to recode mp3tag around a new library. It's unix-centered (mainly various linux, bsd and osx flavors), but there are windows ports available. The most promising is TagLib, which gives everything id3lib has to offer, plus full 2.4 support out of the box. There ARE better, active, developed and full-featured id3 libs out there! Now, since mp3tag is an alive and kicking project (v2.35 is fresh stuff -)), why not consider another library? I just visited the id3lib website and browsed the mailing list, to find out that id3lib has no v2.4 support (which I want to remember, brings full UTF-8 and UTF-16 compatibility, and many other enhancements and fixes), and is quite dead (the only active developer and maintaner, has admitted it has NO TIME to devote to the lib anymore, and the lib isn't making ANY real improvement at all since 2003).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |