Status of this site and svn question

Archive of historical development discussions
Discussions / Development has moved to GitHub
Forum rules
*******************************
Please be aware we are now using GitHub for issue tracking and feature requests.
- This section of the forum is now closed to new topics.

*******************************
Post Reply
dynaflash
Veteran User
Posts: 3820
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 8:19 pm

Status of this site and svn question

Post by dynaflash »

I guess this is basically addressed to rhester as he setup and is hosting this site with the svn tree and forum.

I know from your announcement that you do not have time to develop HB. So, I was just wondering if you are intending to keep this site and svn tree open to those of us attempting to struggle on.

There is no doubt that this is an invaluable resource and allows us to work together yet still keep in touch with the Official HB. Our thanks go out to you.

If in the future you see any need to take this site down or anything like that, please let us know so we can take steps to setup another development site to continue on (assuming titer doesnt resurface).

Again, thanks goes out to rhester, chrislong and any of the other developers I may have forgotten or am otherwise unaware of, that took HB to the next level especially with h.264 level 3.0 output.

As always, we will continue to look to you for advice or contributions as your valuable time may permit.

Joe

rhester
Veteran User
Posts: 2888
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 10:24 pm

Post by rhester »

This forum, the informational site and the svn will stay available indefinitely (read: permanently unless titer's situation changes or someone would rather rehost it). Being on a home server, I can't guarantee 100% uptime, but I think it definitely exceeds 95% and should be suitable for ongoing development.

In short - you have a home for as long as you want it. :) That's why I built it...figuring that there's a very real chance that someday titer's site will fall off the map and never return.

Rodney

dynaflash
Veteran User
Posts: 3820
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 8:19 pm

Post by dynaflash »

rhester,
Thank You so much from all of us! Oddly enough, concerning Titer, I see he checked in a version of x264 over at their svn on 11/25 I think. So, he is apparently still breathing assuming it is the same titer.

I am currently trying to merge this version 70 with a newer x264 which incorporates altivec enhancements which should speed things up very much.

Thanks again and let us know how all is going from time to time.

jbrjake
Veteran User
Posts: 4805
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 1:38 am

Post by jbrjake »

dynaflash wrote:rhester,
Thank You so much from all of us!
Seriously. Thank you. Every time I hit handbrake.m0k.org/forum I swear I see digital tumble weeds rolling by. You can ignore the site for half a year, come back, and catch up on threads in 5 minutes. ;P
Oddly enough, concerning Titer, I see he checked in a version of x264 over at their svn on 11/25 I think. So, he is apparently still breathing assuming it is the same titer.
I downloaded that new official svn branch the other day. The whole directory is misnamed "Makefile" and it doesn't have any jam rules or configure file included...not sure what that's about. At the same time, the directory structure is different (test/ is now cli/) so the old rules won't work...

On the plus side, he does implement there the new x264 core with G. Poirier's Altivec enhancements, so it should see the same speed boosts I mentioned in the other thread. As a result, titer made some little changes like param.rc.i_rc_method = X264_RC_ABR; instead of param.rc.b_cbr = 1;. Should be helpful for getting x264 merged to this svn--certainly helped me.

dynaflash
Veteran User
Posts: 3820
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 8:19 pm

Post by dynaflash »

Dont want to sound stupid, but would the altivec changes be realized on the new Intel Macs or is it just going to help us ppc folk?

I almost fell over when I saw 10 fps on a 1g powerbook with 640 x 480 h.264 Level 3.0 !

Plus, in some of the other revisions after the one currently being used I noticed some Intel improvements that addressed memory I think.

jbrjake
Veteran User
Posts: 4805
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 1:38 am

Post by jbrjake »

dynaflash wrote:Dont want to sound stupid, but would the altivec changes be realized on the new Intel Macs or is it just going to help us ppc folk?
Just us PPC folk.

There was an MMX enhancement made right before the Altivec ones, though, which should speed things for the Intel crowd:
11/06/06 23:49:41 pengvado 10% faster deblock mmx functions. ported from ffmpeg.

Post Reply