On 2020-08-20 19:49 +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
> Alexander Strasser (12020-08-17):
> > I think the pendulum can swing in both direction here. So the overall
> > effect is not clear to me. E.g. one developer may think
> >
> > "hey what's this -> i need to fix it"
> >
> > another might think
> >
> > "hey what's this -> better just copy and not look into it"
> >
> > and a third might think
> >
> > "hey what's this -> just another idiosyncrasy :("
>
> Fortunately, patches are not accepted without review: they will do that,
> the reviewer will ask them to fix the test and re-submit.
True, that might work for the second developer, the third might get
silently fed up.
> > Here are some suggestions in no particular order:
> >
> > * auto_conversion_filters (from Marton)
>
> I can be ok with this one. I really dislike boolean options that default
> to yes and have to be disabled with no, because it requires remembering
> what the default is, but if that is what everybody else prefers.
>
> > * lavfi_auto_conversion
> > * lavfi_autoconv
> > * lavfi_sample_format_conversion
> > * lavfi_fmt_conversion (in reference to pix_fmt and sample_fmt)
> > * lavfi_fmt_conv
>
> The last three lack the "auto" bit. Explicit conversions are still
> supported.
I wonder if the auto (automatic) part is really needed for the name.
AFAIU explicit conversions are just explicit use of filters which change
the sample formats. I guess it would really far fetched to assume that
those could be disabled, since it would be like disabling all filters
or like allowing no conversions in the filter graph at all.
I agree it's possible to misunderstand, though I would have said not
very likely. After you said it out loud, it feels a little bit more
likely to me now ;-)
Alexander
_______________________________________________
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".
