Re: New options for freeswitch

[David Laight <david%l8s.co.uk@localhost>]

On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 03:53:20AM +0400, Aleksej Saushev wrote:
> "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy%NetBSD.org@localhost> writes:
> 
> > On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 09:00:03 +0200
> > Martin Husemann <martin%duskware.de@localhost> wrote:
> >> Why bother selecting? Can't you just install all encodings?
> >
> > Size?
> >
> > 18M     8000
> > 36M     16000
> > 73M     32000
> > 109M    48000
> >
> > So, this discussion has gone far afield.  The original question was
> > what to use as option names.  Does anyone have an opinion on that
> > regardless of any of these other questions?
> 
> "Bitrate" is less cryptical in my opinion, but I still doubt it is
> reasonable to introdue those as options. I'd prefer if they were
> several packages, since it simplifies handling (you can provide
> binary packages, package failures are more visible, e.g. in pbulk).

Those 'bitrates' look lines the ones used for the telephony audio.
As such everyone will want 8k. I think 16k is used for some
high-quality audio (but maybe I'm thinking of 16bit samples at 8kHz),
dunno about the others.

Those sizes look 'interesting' in the sense that the higher bit rate
ones are huge!
Maybe the sizes are dominated by some audio files?
If so, maybe they need splitting from the program.

        David

-- 
David Laight: david%l8s.co.uk@localhost