[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] fix speex sample
Thu Apr 9 02:26:11 CEST 2009
On 4/8/2009 5:02 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 08, 2009 at 04:21:32PM -0700, Baptiste Coudurier wrote:
>> On 4/8/2009 3:46 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>>> The multiple stsd feature is implemented, and I submited a patch, it
>>>> depends on one seeking fix in aviobuf.c, for which I also sent a patch.
>>>> Not mentioning that it takes me approximately 1 day to address issues on
>>>> roundup relative to mov/mp4. Btw you are listed as maintainer for mov as
>>>> well ;)
>>>> This is effectively a different kind of maintainership.
>>> it is not, you can look at avidec/enc and its also pretty bug free, or
>>> msmpeg4 or the mpeg1/2 decoder ...
>> msmpeg4 that should be true.
>> Mpeg2 decoder has an important bug IMHO since some time. I reported it,
>> and libmpeg2 does not have this bug and decodes correctly the first 2
>> frames. I lack some knowledge of the surrounding code, but I tried to
>> work on it at least. It should not take you much time to figure out the
>> problem I guess.
> thats a feature request not a bug, its something very well known since
> the code was written.
What was your argument about other implementation supporting it ?
Oh yes, users will stop using yours to use the one supporting it.
FYI, many of my samples use this mechanism, I just didn't really realize
it, I thought it was just broken link but finally, I discovered that
libavcodec deliberately _skip_ 2 frames, even without telling you !
Solution is simple, until fixed I will use libmpeg2.
>> Avi demuxer had a bug I fixed recently. I should have wait a few months,
>> damn ;)
> now if i could remember which of the 2 lines svn blame assigns to you from
> more than 1000 in avidec you mean here ;)
> not that either is particularely recent
Well, you are way older than me, let me catch up ;)
>>> flv is a little worse but not much
>>> and then there is mpeg-ts & ffserver for which i belive you are maintainer
>>> now, they are not even remotely close to bugfree not even close to flvdecs
>> AFAIK I'm not official maintainer of mpeg-ts, but I don't mind being
>> maintainer and fixing bugs.
> i see, so i will suspent all my work on mpeg-ts now
I didn't know you were working on TS, may I see the patch ?
>> FFserver is certainly not bug free, however all roundup issue were
>> closed and fixed AFAIK, and it's working quite ok for me.
> issue238 and 797 have ffserver in the title and are open
Humm right, it seems issue 238 is way old, I was not maintainer back in
the days, and the version is damn old, I will close it.
About 797, user should use AVOption ab now anyway so this is not an issue :)
Thanks for helping me closing roundup issues.
> also there is no working ffserver regression test, you might have closed
> all issues but as long as ffserver cant produce non random output its not
> too usefull or did you fix this?
I produces stable results here, however I'd be happy to receive feedback
>>>>>> but that's all right
>>>>>> with me. Let's wait a few months ;)
>>>>> you dont need to wait a few month before you fix your patch ;)
>>>> Well, like you said pretty well, I can spend my time on something else
>>>> than something maintainer is able to fix ;)
>>>> I don't have problem with this file personally, someone submited this
>>>> file. I just don't like bugs.
>>>> If I were maintainer, I would have fixed it already, that's the whole
>>>> point. I would even have addressed your comments on -cvslog and changed
>>>> my original commit ;)
>>> well, but you are not maintainer, and you will not become maintainer either
>>> if that prevents you from fixing flvdec, thats a pitty, cant be helped i
>> Yes it can be helped, and you know it.
>> But that's no problem for me, it's just that I will have hard time
>> excusing you for refusing to let it go while you keep saying you don't
>> have time for it.
>> You just cannot reasonably refuse to share maintainership and say that
>> you don't have time to do it.
> dont twist the truth
> i do have time to review patches to flvdec.c i do not have the time nor
> interrest to rewrite patches.
I don't twist the truth IMHO.
IMHO you do not have enough time to be the only maintainer for flv.
_Only_ reviewing patch is not my idea of "maintainership".
Maintainership is about reviewing _and_ coding by _enhancing_ and
> and i refuse you to take co maintainership because you commited broken code
No, it's not broken. It fixed the issue and I'm still waiting for your
"correct" fix since your last proposition does _not_ work.
Furthermore you guessed something which was wrong since flv demuxer
could not even return empty packets. How good is this ?
Then I gave you the sample.
> and submited a broken patch to flvdec thats 2 bad out of 2.
No patch is _perfectly_ fine, and it actually fixes the problem.
You just twisted specs to fit your arguments here, even Mike
acknowledged my argument.
Please stop the FUD.
Baptiste COUDURIER GnuPG Key Id: 0x5C1ABAAA
Key fingerprint 8D77134D20CC9220201FC5DB0AC9325C5C1ABAAA
checking for life_signs in -lkenny... no
FFmpeg maintainer http://www.ffmpeg.org
More information about the ffmpeg-devel