[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 5/5] doc: remove avutil.txt

Alexander Strasser eclipse7 at gmx.net
Sat Nov 30 19:32:19 CET 2013

On 2013-11-30 02:03 +0100, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> On date Friday 2013-11-29 20:11:04 +0100, Alexander Strasser encoded:
> > On 2013-11-10 17:40 -0300, James Almer wrote:
> > > On 10/11/13 5:28 PM, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> [...]
> > > I wrote them with no other purpose than making lavu's crypto portion as feature 
> > > complete as possible, hopefully on par with tomcrypt or openssl's crypto in the 
> > > long run.
> > > Stopped after RIPEMD and SHA-2 512 since i realized that maybe lavu wasn't meant 
> > > to be like that, or even used like that for that matter. Hence me asking this now.
> > 
> >   It was meant to be a useful and complete utility library that is an
> > extension to the C standard library. But this decision was not respected
> > and finally undermined when the fork happened.
> It still *is* IMO. The main divergence was when libavcore was merged
> back into libavutil. We gain nothing from splitting the library again,
> but we should make it possible to enable only the wanted modules. This
> might require some non-trivial maintainance work.
> But even if we manage to get a complete utility library (which is not
> impossible), I'm not sure people will trust to use a multimedia
> project library for handling generic, non media-related stuff.

  I do not really disagree with anything you are saying here.
Though there is no conclusive definite states of trustworthiness
and completeness. In the beginning there was only the name that
was a bit in the way for using it in other projects. The code
wasn't yet used very much in other projects or other contexts.
This changed over time and different libs and apps began to use
the code. All media-related software, but they did not use
media-related functionality from lavu.

  Now there is loads of multimedia stuff which will give
outsiders the feeling lavu is not meant to be used outside of
media related software...

  Most people that are not scared away yet will rather "steal"
the code they need from lavu instead of using the library.
Some of that can probably be fixed.

  Anyway nothing is impossible, if one or more people are
willing to put effort into it even libavutil can shine
some day.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20131130/09859b77/attachment.asc>

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list