On Sat, 6 Feb 2016 17:48:17 +0100 Andreas Cadhalpun <andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 06.02.2016 17:42, wm4 wrote: > > On Sat, 6 Feb 2016 17:38:45 +0100 > > Andreas Cadhalpun <andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > >> On 06.02.2016 17:35, wm4 wrote: > >>> On Sat, 6 Feb 2016 17:32:12 +0100 > >>> Andreas Cadhalpun <andreas.cadhal...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >>>> So what do you suggest instead to get VLC's hwaccels working again soon? > >>>> > >>> > >>> Send a patch to VLC. > >> > >> Writing such a patch is not easy. > >> Feel free to prove me wrong by doing it. > > > > We don't give in to blackmail (which is pretty what that VLC dev did) > > I think you misunderstood something. > We shouldn't gratuitously break API users. It's not an API break. > > just because it's more convenient for you. > > This has nothing to do with my convenience. It is about fixing an > important regression caused by a commit you reviewed. It's not a regression in FFmpeg or its API. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
