Hi Andreas, Thanks for the feedback. I put out an RFC back in March but got no comments.
On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 6:01 PM Andreas Rheinhardt <andreas.rheinha...@outlook.com> wrote: > A timestamp without a timebase? Doesn't sound good to me. And it also > seems quite hacky. > Apart from that: It needs to specify that the data is a int64_t. So you're suggesting a struct that contains both the timestamp and a timebase? I don't have any real objection to this. I agree it seems hacky, but don't have a better solution. I welcome constructive suggestions. I had considered using an AVPacket metadata field rather than a new side data type (as that won't necessarily lock us into a new side data type that we would have to support), and the functionality is really specific to one use case. However I figured side data might be better since it avoids the conversion of the PTS to a string and back. Devin -- Devin Heitmueller, Senior Software Engineer LTN Global Communications o: +1 (301) 363-1001 w: https://ltnglobal.com e: devin.heitmuel...@ltnglobal.com _______________________________________________ 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".
