2018-12-17 22:51 GMT+01:00, Jan Ekström <jee...@gmail.com>: > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:47 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> 2018-12-17 22:45 GMT+01:00, Jan Ekström <jee...@gmail.com>: >> > 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 don't understand: >> Why are you asking this after pushing the objected patch? >> > > Because I had mentioned my opinion, and then you seemingly dropped the > topic in the following replies, which seemed to me like that was it. > > And now that you object, I want to know what you want.
That you mention the ticket that contains a link to the only sample we know of. Since the sample cannot be played without your patch but plays now, I believe you fixed the ticket but if you disagree you could have written "does not fix ticket ...". Which of course makes no difference now. Carl Eugen _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
