Vasile Toncu (2017-12-28): > >Are there any features that tinterlace has and this new filter has not? > >If not, then I think it would be better to just replace tinterlace > >entirely. > The main difference between those those two filters is that reinterlace > processes > planes of output frames in parallel. > > Another difference is that reinterlace introduces two new modes, which are > described at [1]
You did not answer the question. I asked if there are features in tinterlace that are not in reinterlace. You answered the opposite question. > >I can answer myself: tinterlace has asm optimizations. This is not for > >me only to decide, but I am rather against having duplicated features > >just for licensing reasons. > >In this particular instance, I think you could use the GPL asm > >optimizations while having the filter itself LGPL. > Your arguments are valid, but what happens if I want to use a GPL tinterlace > in an closed source application that will be distributed. You cannot. But making tinterlace LGPL would solve that for you just the same as adding yet another filter that does the same thing. As I said, I oppose duplicated features, except for very good reasons. Licensing is not a good reason from my point of view. Regards, -- Nicolas George
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
