[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 1/6] lavfi/buffersink: add accessors for the stream properties.
george at nsup.org
Sat Dec 24 00:46:07 EET 2016
Le tridi 3 nivôse, an CCXXV, Michael Niedermayer a écrit :
> shouldnt there be a public annoncement about the intend to make the API public
> shouldnt there be a public call for API design suggestions and discussion
> shouldnt there be a public call for API related patches with deadline
> shouldnt there be a go/no-go poll of the FFmpeg developers
I am not sure what you are angling at here. I announced my projects to
rework the internal workings and global API when I started working on
making request_frame non-recursive (note: request_frame, not
filter_frame; this patch landed more than a year ago) and mentioned them
several times since then, for example when Paul considered working on
threading IIRC. I did not gave that much details because nobody seemed
interested in them.
And of course, no significant change in API or design went in without
staying for quite a time on the mailing-list.
> I dont think a wait period makes sense. By the time everyone is ok
> with making the API public the code will have been more then
> extensivly tested and waiting further would likely add little
So you are saying that the wait period will take care of itself even if
we do not decide to enforce it. I am ok with it.
And, after all, what do you want, concretely?
I, personally, am not working on making external filters possible. But I
am not preventing it either. (Well, this patch makes it a little bit
more work, but just work, not hard.) And I think that when I am done
with my plan, it will be actually easier because a cleaner internal API
is easier to make public.
Another point: this particular patch, and the series that surrounds it,
I do not really want it. For all I care, we could drop it (either all
the series, or just 5-6 because 1-4 make the code clearer).
On the other hand, Andreas, Clément, Hendrik and James would not be
happy, because they insisted to hide the innards of AVFilterLink more
deeply after the filter_frame patch. This was discussed on the mailing
list. I probably should let you discuss the issue with them. The code is
written, it did not take much time and does not interact with my current
work: it can be applied or dropped indifferently.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the ffmpeg-devel