Bug 2244819

Summary:	Review Request: xeve - Reference MPEG-5 Part 1 (EVC) encoder
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Neal Gompa <ngompa13>
Component:	Package Review	Assignee:	Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>
Status:	NEW ---	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	rawhide	CC:	amoloney, package-review
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
URL:	https://github.com/mpeg5/xeve
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:		Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	182235, 2218117

Description Neal Gompa 2023-10-18 12:45:20 UTC

Spec URL: https://ngompa.fedorapeople.org/for-review/xeve.spec
SRPM URL: https://ngompa.fedorapeople.org/for-review/xeve-0.4.3-1.fc39.src.rpm

Description:
The eXtra-fast Essential Video Encoder (XEVE) is an
opensource and fast MPEG-5 EVC encoder.

MPEG-5 Essential Video Coding (EVC) is a video compression
standard of ISO/IEC Moving Picture Experts Grop (MPEG).
The main goal of the EVC is to provide a significantly
improved compression capability over existing video coding
standards with timely publication of terms.

EVC defines two profiles, including "Baseline Profile" and "Main Profile".

The "Baseline profile" contains only technologies that are older than
20 years or otherwise freely available for use in the standard.
In addition, the "Main profile" adds a small number of additional tools,
each of which can be either cleanly disabled or switched to the
corresponding baseline tool on an individual basis.

This package only includes the "Baseline profile".


Fedora Account System Username: ngompa

Comment 1 Fedora Review Service 2023-10-18 12:55:38 UTC

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6543576
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2244819-xeve/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06543576-xeve/fedora-review/review.txt

Please take a look if any issues were found.

---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Comment 2 Neal Gompa 2023-10-27 07:24:55 UTC

Requesting FE-Legal to review whether the stripping is sufficient.

Comment 3 Aoife Moloney 2024-01-04 20:17:08 UTC

Hi Neal,

From discussing this with the internal team, the feedback is that the video codecs need to be released 25+ years in order to be included in Fedora and/or RHEL, and the bz's (including rhbz#2244820) and/or github files associated with them are not clear that they meet this criteria. Is there a way you can verify that they do in fact meet this requirement?


Thanks,
Aoife

Comment 4 Neal Gompa 2024-01-04 20:45:09 UTC

(In reply to Aoife Moloney from comment #3)
> Hi Neal,
> 
> From discussing this with the internal team, the feedback is that the video
> codecs need to be released 25+ years in order to be included in Fedora
> and/or RHEL, and the bz's (including rhbz#2244820) and/or github files
> associated with them are not clear that they meet this criteria. Is there a
> way you can verify that they do in fact meet this requirement?
> 

The rule I've been told is 20 years rather than 25 years, since the former is the length of time of a patent.

That being said, the whitepaper published by MPEG about the new codec explicitly notes this:

> The Baseline profile contains technologies assessed to be over 20 years to maximally approach to a royalty free codec.
> The Baseline profile builds a video codec using only conventional coding technologies which consist of traditional methods
> from the early 1980s to the end of the 1990s.

From: https://www.mpeg.org/wp-content/uploads/mpeg_meetings/136_OnLine/w21036.zip

From: https://www.mpeg.org/standards/MPEG-5/1/

From that perspective, it should fulfill the necessary requirements.

Comment 5 Aoife Moloney 2024-01-04 20:50:49 UTC

Thank you for the quick reply! Let me take this back to the team and see if this satisfies the requirements to unblock  this bug and the associated bug too.