[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/5] movenc: simplify codec_tag lookup

Marton Balint cus at passwd.hu
Mon Jul 3 19:54:56 EEST 2017

On Mon, 3 Jul 2017, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 5:39 PM, wm4 <nfxjfg at googlemail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 3 Jul 2017 16:17:42 +0100
>> Derek Buitenhuis <derek.buitenhuis at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 7/3/2017 2:18 AM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>>> > breaks fate
>>> I'll look into it tonight; busy today.
>>> .
>>> .
>>> .
>>> Aside:
>>> I'll just add, though, that these two word 'breaks fate' emails
>>> are kind of obnoxious when the test in question was added days
>>> after I sent the set, so I couldn't have possibly tested against
>>> it, and the commit that added the test and this email has /zero/
>>> info about what the test actually tests (a bug id is not a commit
>>> message).
>> This. These opaque fate tests are so much work to get around. It went
>> far enough that I added bullshit to ffmpeg.c to get around some of the
>> questionable tests.
>> Also, TRAC issue numbers have 0 information contents. Even if you go
>> through the obnoxious process of looking it up on TRAC and trying to
>> extract iunformation from a confusing discussion with a confused user
>> (99% of TRAC issues), TRAC could easily go away. It already happened
>> once, and some of the bug numbers in old commits obviously don't match
>> with what's on current TRAC.
> I agree, this test could've easily been named something useful, like
> fate-mp4-copy-eac3 or whatever namespaces we use for mp4 tests, which
> would convey the same information without having to lookup the ticket
> on trac.

Can't the project pay someone to make fate tests from fixed trac tickets? 
Or make this an outreachy goal, like API tests, or something like that.


More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list