On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 10:57 AM, Michael Niedermayer <michae...@gmx.at> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 03, 2015 at 12:38:40PM +0000, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote: >> Carl Eugen Hoyos <cehoyos <at> ag.or.at> writes: >> >> > The encoder produces conforming and - if requested - >> > lossless files, it should not be marked experimental imo. >> >> Ping? > > no objections from me
Sorry for the late comment, but I see quite a few tickets related to jpeg2000 on trac (e.g 4653, 4679, 4669, 4601). I have not studied these carefully, but it seems like certain parts of jpeg2000 spec have still not been implemented. I am not aware of the policy for when removal of experimental flag is done, but it seems like additional work is needed for jpeg2000. Can someone check these and make sure it is ok to remove the experimental flag? > > [...] > -- > Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB > > The real ebay dictionary, page 3 > "Rare item" - "Common item with rare defect or maybe just a lie" > "Professional" - "'Toy' made in china, not functional except as doorstop" > "Experts will know" - "The seller hopes you are not an expert" > > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-devel mailing list > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel > _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
