found this -
http://www.lemnews.com/dl/lame-3.97a2.rar
LAME 3.97 - alpha2 May 28 2004
Is this of any use?
Full Version: LAME 3.97 alpha2?
I think the usual answer for this is that this is UNSTABLE, in capital letters, and it will probaly try to steal your girlfriend and/or make your computer explode.
But you can test some stuff from the upcoming LAME version, so it might be good. Try for yourself, but don't archive or share anything encoded with this. (in fact, don't even share at all, as that is mostly illegal
)
But you can test some stuff from the upcoming LAME version, so it might be good. Try for yourself, but don't archive or share anything encoded with this. (in fact, don't even share at all, as that is mostly illegal
)
It's on RareWares, too: http://www.rarewares.org/mp3.html
QUOTE
(in fact, don't even share at all, as that is mostly illegal)
not if its copyright-free music ;-)
- Lyx
Why are all of you people so scared about betas and alphas of the software?
Alphas and betas can be more stable than the release.
For example the LAME 3.97 alpha2
It contains the bugfix for the crash when encoding with VBR in lame 3.96.
So technically it is more stable then the 3.96 release, and it is more likely that 3.96 will steal your girlfriend and make your computer explode.
Alphas and betas can be more stable than the release.
For example the LAME 3.97 alpha2
It contains the bugfix for the crash when encoding with VBR in lame 3.96.
So technically it is more stable then the 3.96 release, and it is more likely that 3.96 will steal your girlfriend and make your computer explode.
Well, with audio codecs the things are somewhat different. Even the slightest bug can ruin the quality of your music, and also it's relatively difficult to find bugs in audio codecs (that's why abx rulez(s)). Also, alfa versions aren't tested for quality much (edit: of course this is what we should do - test it a lot as alphas are for testing purposes)
To say alphas and betas are more stable than the final release is to misunderstand the concept. Alphas and betas may fix one problem and at the same time introduce other new ones. That is why they are called alphas and betas as they are the first and following fixes. Only after they alpha and betas are thouroughly tested are they released as final. This is how it is supposed to work and usually does on the "real" world. In a rigorously controlled environment this is how it is done. I worked in this environment for 20+ years and when the guidlines for software testing are adhered to that is the result. Less than rigorous adherence to guidlines can create problems.
L8R
L8R
simple rule of thumb (may not apply to every case) - not just concerning lame:
Alpha=throw in some new prototype ideas which theoretically should improve stuff but probably break other things. Stability (in the case of lame, stable-quality!) is unimportant here - its about adding new stuff. This is the phase were dangerous new toys get test-driven.
PreBeta=begin to fix the most severe bugs introduced in the alpha
Beta=squish more bugs and try to get the app stable and safe to use
RC=no serious bugs left - but maybe we've missed something? Lets check!
Final/Stable=considered safe and stable to use
- Lyx
edit: yes, it can theoretically happen that an alpha is more stable than a final release. However, you don't know if thats the case and often, even the developers don't know if thats the case - because thats what an alpha is for - try out how some risky new features work out. The developers label it an alpha, because they think that the probability that it worsens the situation is higher, than the probability that it improves the app as a whole for the end-user.
So, by using alpha-versions for daily use, you're basically doing a risky gamble.
Alpha=throw in some new prototype ideas which theoretically should improve stuff but probably break other things. Stability (in the case of lame, stable-quality!) is unimportant here - its about adding new stuff. This is the phase were dangerous new toys get test-driven.
PreBeta=begin to fix the most severe bugs introduced in the alpha
Beta=squish more bugs and try to get the app stable and safe to use
RC=no serious bugs left - but maybe we've missed something? Lets check!
Final/Stable=considered safe and stable to use
- Lyx
edit: yes, it can theoretically happen that an alpha is more stable than a final release. However, you don't know if thats the case and often, even the developers don't know if thats the case - because thats what an alpha is for - try out how some risky new features work out. The developers label it an alpha, because they think that the probability that it worsens the situation is higher, than the probability that it improves the app as a whole for the end-user.
So, by using alpha-versions for daily use, you're basically doing a risky gamble.
QUOTE(Lyx @ May 31 2004, 05:38 AM)
Alpha=throw in some new prototype ideas which theoretically should improve stuff but probably break other things. Stability (in the case of lame, stable-quality!) is unimportant here - its about adding new stuff. This is the phase were dangerous new toys get test-driven.
PreBeta=begin to fix the most severe bugs introduced in the alpha
Beta=squish more bugs and try to get the app stable and safe to use
RC=no serious bugs left - but maybe we've missed something? Lets check!
Final/Stable=considered safe and stable to use
PreBeta=begin to fix the most severe bugs introduced in the alpha
Beta=squish more bugs and try to get the app stable and safe to use
RC=no serious bugs left - but maybe we've missed something? Lets check!
Final/Stable=considered safe and stable to use
Just curious - could one describe his life using such terms - "Oh, my body isn't going to reach prebeta this year. but my mind is already final!"
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.