On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 4:29 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Am Sa., 1. Aug. 2020 um 14:47 Uhr schrieb Jan Ekström <jee...@gmail.com>: > > > > On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 3:08 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Am Sa., 1. Aug. 2020 um 14:06 Uhr schrieb Jan Ekström <jee...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > Additionally, the spec only mentions stereo/5.1 for direct mapping, so > > > > I've kept to 5.1 since we have the capability for that one. > > > > > > And you still believe it would be a disadvantage if the decoder outputs > > > this 5.1 mapping by default if nothing else was requested? > > > > Yes. API users so far have received the audio frames according to > > encoded layout by default, so doing something else breaks that rule of > > least surprises. > > > > > Is there an option to request the 5.1 mapping? > > > > As noted in the 0/0 cover letter, you can do it just fine with > > `-channel_layout "5.1"` with ffmpeg.c. I have verified that it returns > > the 5.1 channels as-is. > > But this does not make the decoder output 5.1 or does it? > > While I should probably only care about ffmpeg and ignore > the library users I still wonder who can live with your approach... >
As this can be implied to be a comment regarding me not caring about the API users, and generally being wording that can be interpreted as disagreeing on the whole approach of the patch set, please respond whether this is a blocker or not. I'd rather get some closure on this one way or another, than stressing over whether this review was a blocker or not. Thank you, Jan _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
