I am thinking of naming it as vpc instead, which aligns with avc.c and hevc.c. What do you think?
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Vignesh Venkatasubramanian < vigneshv-at-google....@ffmpeg.org> wrote: > On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Ronald S. Bultje <rsbul...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 6:25 PM, Kongqun Yang <yangkong...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > Implemented according to the draft specification > > > "VP Codec ISO Media File Format Binding": > > > > > > > http://www.webmproject.org/vp9/#draft-vp-codec-iso-media-file-format-binding > > > > > > Change-Id: Iaa7ddf5524b17e8d79cd1923b26f096deeee6e91 > > > --- > > > libavformat/Makefile | 2 +- > > > libavformat/isom.c | 3 + > > > libavformat/movenc.c | 15 +++++ > > > libavformat/vpx.c | 170 > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > libavformat/vpx.h | 33 ++++++++++ > > > > > > I don't particularly love the name "vpx.c" and "vpx.h", because they will > > make people think this is related to libvpx instead of just generic > > vp-something helpers. To prevent that, let's call it vpn. > > umm, vpn seems weird. how about 'vpcc' given that the functions in > this file are about writing out the vpcc atom? > > > > > Ronald > > _______________________________________________ > > ffmpeg-devel mailing list > > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org > > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel > > > > > -- > Vignesh > _______________________________________________ > 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
