On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 13:20:29 +0100 Paul B Mahol <one...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/29/17, wm4 <nfx...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 13:06:13 +0100 > > Nicolas George <geo...@nsup.org> wrote: > > > >> Le decadi 10 pluviose, an CCXXV, wm4 a ecrit : > >> > Then you should stop moving away from it. The av_frame_make_writable > >> > design is superior for multiple reasons, and was intentionally designed > >> > this way by an intelligent mind with a lot of API-foresight. > >> > > >> > If you "move away from it" just like this, you create a major > >> > inconsistency as well. > >> > > >> > I haven't heard a good argument as to why its API is supposed to be > >> > better than av_frame_make_writable. > >> > > >> > I one the other hand delivered a bunch of arguments to which you didn't > >> > reply. > >> > >> Rude again. > > > > No, it's not rude. > > > > Maybe you could get technical again, after you've sent only a bunch of > > cranky posts complaining about my supposedly bad behavior? > > I'm really sick of you two. I too would rather prefer having a technical discussion instead of shit-flinging. But that is apparently not possible. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
