On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 23:46:25 +0200
Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 05:55:37PM +0200, wm4 wrote:
> > On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 17:34:51 +0200
> > Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 05:07:33PM +0200, wm4 wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 17:00:32 +020
On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 10:24:31PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
[...]
> > If they used distro packages then they wouldn't have any power over what
> > gets built or shipped. Distro packages are the "Enable everything" kind
> > of build, so I'm of course talking about projects shipping their own
> >
On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 05:55:37PM +0200, wm4 wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 17:34:51 +0200
> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 05:07:33PM +0200, wm4 wrote:
> > > On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 17:00:32 +0200
> > > Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all
> > > >
> > > > Nic
First of all, thanks for taking the time to discuss this. It has been
too long, and the arguments need to be sharpened.
James Almer (2018-03-25):
> Considering most are pretty small but not small enough to be dumped into
> a header, no, I'm not joking.
> Maybe avpriv_dnxhd_get_frame_size() should
On 3/25/2018 1:58 PM, Nicolas George wrote:
> James Almer (2018-03-25):
>> Most avpriv_ functions exist solely to avoid code duplication. If it's
>
> Most functions exist solely to avoid code duplication. Functions,
> unqualified, all of them: static, ff_, etc. The avpriv_ prefix only
> exists bec
James Almer (2018-03-25):
> Most avpriv_ functions exist solely to avoid code duplication. If it's
Most functions exist solely to avoid code duplication. Functions,
unqualified, all of them: static, ff_, etc. The avpriv_ prefix only
exists because of library boundaries.
> so much of an issue we c
On 3/25/2018 12:56 PM, wm4 wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 12:47:41 -0300
> James Almer wrote:
>
>> On 3/25/2018 12:19 PM, Nicolas George wrote:
>>> Michael Niedermayer (2018-03-25):
looking at what we have as avprivs, in the tree, i think some of these
could be indeed usefull as public
On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 12:47:41 -0300
James Almer wrote:
> On 3/25/2018 12:19 PM, Nicolas George wrote:
> > Michael Niedermayer (2018-03-25):
> >> looking at what we have as avprivs, in the tree, i think some of these
> >> could be indeed usefull as public APIs. And we need to already keep them
>
On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 17:34:51 +0200
Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 05:07:33PM +0200, wm4 wrote:
> > On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 17:00:32 +0200
> > Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all
> > >
> > > Nicolas wrote an interresting comment about avpriv, and as this better
> > >
On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 17:39:17 +0200
Nicolas George wrote:
> Michael Niedermayer (2018-03-25):
> > The thread is for finding out peoples oppinon before anyone spends time
> > writing patches.
>
> If you have time to spend on the avpriv issue, I suggest you spend it
> trying to get this working.
On 3/25/2018 12:19 PM, Nicolas George wrote:
> Michael Niedermayer (2018-03-25):
>> looking at what we have as avprivs, in the tree, i think some of these
>> could be indeed usefull as public APIs. And we need to already keep them
>> compatible as they are exported as avpriv too, so making such cha
Michael Niedermayer (2018-03-25):
> The thread is for finding out peoples oppinon before anyone spends time
> writing patches.
If you have time to spend on the avpriv issue, I suggest you spend it
trying to get this working. It would be most beneficial.
Regards,
--
Nicolas George
From fcf7b62
On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 05:07:33PM +0200, wm4 wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 17:00:32 +0200
> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>
> > Hi all
> >
> > Nicolas wrote an interresting comment about avpriv, and as this better
> > belongs into a new thread, here it is in a new thread
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 25, 20
Michael Niedermayer (2018-03-25):
> looking at what we have as avprivs, in the tree, i think some of these
> could be indeed usefull as public APIs. And we need to already keep them
> compatible as they are exported as avpriv too, so making such changes does
> indeed in some cases look like a good
On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 17:00:32 +0200
Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> Hi all
>
> Nicolas wrote an interresting comment about avpriv, and as this better
> belongs into a new thread, here it is in a new thread
>
> On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 03:32:33PM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
> > Josh de Kock (2018-03
15 matches
Mail list logo
