[FFmpeg-devel] About guess_correct_pts / AVFrame.best_effort_timestamp

Michael Niedermayer michaelni
Fri Feb 18 21:38:03 CET 2011

On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 07:05:30PM +0100, Luca Barbato wrote:
> On 02/18/2011 06:31 PM, Reimar D?ffinger wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 10:23:24PM +0100, Luca Barbato wrote:
> >> I tried to explain my reasoning, do you find something that wrong with it?
> > 
> > I do not remember what you argued but everything I heard ranges from
> > "complete nonsense" to "I don't see that happening any time soon and
> > I doubt it won't work worse".
> > The issue with doing it in libavformat is that you need to have
> > AVParsers that can do both pts->dts and dts->pts fillup.
> > This is a good bit of code, and for dts->pts we at best have something
> > we can reuse in some encoders, but generally we really don't.
> > It also means running parsers, parsing headers and stuff twice when
> > decoding, and running AVParsers for basically any and all formats, even
> > mkv and mov that currently do not need it.
> Let me reinstate:
> - make containers that couldn't be trusted use parsers.

we do that since parsers exist

> (using caps to
> trigger it? )

try it, if you succeed ill be happy to approve the patch.

> - move all the guessing/heuristic code in a single file, possibly in
> avformat, and make those functions public.
> - use the function in ffmpeg/ffplay/ffserver/examples
> Does it sound that wrong?

yes, to someone knowing the code it does. Why do you all talk, why do you reject
patches but not send better patches?

I think the main thing can be summarized in that
you can steal a sword, but this doesnt make you a swordsman
and to become a swordsman you dont need to steal a sword

If anyone can improve the timestamping code, he could have done that since
10 years. There are exactly 0 patches in that timespan that improved it and
where rejected.
I and fabrice where the only people who worked on that code. Thinking that
because you (plural) hijaked the server you all of a sudden know the code
better and are better suited to have the final word on what should be done
is the most ridiculous thing ive heared since a while in FOSS projects.

Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Avoid a single point of failure, be that a person or equipment.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20110218/086fdf0c/attachment.pgp>

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list