On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 09:13:58 -0400 "Ronald S. Bultje" <rsbul...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, > > On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Michael Niedermayer <mich...@niedermayer.cc > > wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 08:01:56AM -0400, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: > > > --- > > > ffmpeg.c | 6 +++++- > > > libavcodec/mpegvideo.c | 4 ++++ > > > libavcodec/options_table.h | 2 ++ > > > libavcodec/pthread_frame.c | 2 ++ > > > 4 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > please also remove me from maintainers from the affected codecs > > in case this code gets actually removed or disabled before a > > documented replacement is in place > > > > i use these for maintaining and testing the code > > > (I expected this sort of reply,) so why is it under a deprecation macro? > > Why hasn't anyone taken the time to write a filter that places these things > on top of a frame, so it could be shared with other codecs that export the > same information? > > Why is all this stuff so utterly hacky? Because features were added without proper design and without thinking whether certain features were really worth making the codebase more complicated. And now we have to deal with this... _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
