On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Nicolas George <geo...@nsup.org> wrote:
> > Also, it would help deciding stuff if you, as a user, told us: if you > had to write "scale=w=1536:h=512" instead of "scale=1536:512" to be > completely sure that your scripts will not break on upgrade, would you > consider that an unacceptable burden? > Obviously not for scripts written now or in the future by those who follow this list, but old/delivered scripts may break and often those executing them aren't the ones who composed them. If the doc patch is being pushed, would you accept if I or others submitted abbreviated alternates for some of the long option names that exist e.g. as in loudnorm. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
