On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:36 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > 2018-12-17 22:27 GMT+01:00, Rodger Combs <g...@videolan.org>: > > ffmpeg | branch: master | Rodger Combs <rodger.co...@gmail.com> | Mon Nov 5 > > 10:26:24 2018 -0600| [6ebe88f3a4c427511eba7495896f4a57a2b4b529] | committer: > > Jan Ekström > > > > lavf/isom: add Dolby Vision sample entry codes for HEVC and H.264 > > > > These are registered identifiers at the MPEG-4 RA, which are > > defined as to be utilized for Dolby Vision AVC/HEVC streams that > > are not correctly presentable by standards-compliant AVC/HEVC players. > > > > According to the Dolby Vision specification for ISOBMFF, these sample > > entry codes are specified to have the standard AVC or HEVC decoder > > configuration box in addition to the Dolby custom DOVIConfigurationBox. > > This is what enables us to decode the streams without custom parsing. > > > > For correct presentation information from the DOVIConfigurationBox > > is required (YCbCr or modified ICtCP, SDR or HDR, base or enhancement > > layer). > > This is not only missing a requested mention of the relevant ticket > where a sample > for this patch is linked (apparently the only one existing) but also a > mention of Igor Selivanov who had sent an identical patch to the mailing list. > > Carl Eugen
Thank you for once, for once actually saying what on earth you want. Now please actually mention how do you want the ticket be mentioned. It is not "fixed" or "fixes" because it cannot be presented without the colorspace being figured out. I commented on this. As for the identical patch, you yourself noted that you quite clearly could see me not knowing about identical work being done, and I had clearly put effort into adding the most appropriate descriptions for the identifiers and writing up a proper commit message. Those by themselves are most likely much more work than just writing up the original patch that Rodger wrote. Also, with all due respect I do not recall us having to mention all of the previous people who had independently come up with the same solution. I think all of us would have been much happier if THESE THINGS were what you had said ages ago. I had wondered for ages what it really was that you wanted to block my changes for. Which is why I specifically noted that if you wanted to block my changes then please SAY SO. You opted to NOT BLOCK and not say anything specifically. And unfortunately at this point I was already completely exhausted and I just wanted to get past this thing, so that unless there was something substantial I would not change the patch set. Jan _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
