[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavr: deprecate the entire library

[Rostislav Pehlivanov]

On 25 December 2017 at 11:03, wm4 <nfxjfg at googlemail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 25 Dec 2017 10:44:40 +0000
> Rostislav Pehlivanov <atomnuker at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 25 December 2017 at 06:50, wm4 <nfxjfg at googlemail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 25 Dec 2017 02:12:38 +0000
> > > Rostislav Pehlivanov <atomnuker at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Rostislav Pehlivanov <atomnuker at gmail.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  doc/APIchanges             |  5 +++++
> > > >  libavresample/avresample.h | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > > >  2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/doc/APIchanges b/doc/APIchanges
> > > > index df79758e86..96fad416d5 100644
> > > > --- a/doc/APIchanges
> > > > +++ b/doc/APIchanges
> > > > @@ -15,6 +15,11 @@ libavutil:     2017-10-21
> > > >
> > > >  API changes, most recent first:
> > > >
> > > > +2017-xx-xx - xxxxxxx - lavr 4.0.0 - avresample.h
> > > > +  Deprecate the entire library. It was unmaintained and redundant
> > > > +  as libswresample did everything it did better, faster, with more
> > > > +  control and with a better, slightly higher level API.
> > > > +
> > >
> > > I don't strongly disagree with the wording and also with the
> > > "deprecation", and I think we should build avr by default instead.
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> > > ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> > > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
> > >
> >
> > Suggest better wording then.
> > I strongly disagree with your suggestion to make avr the default. That
>
> Not the default, just build it by default.
>
> > would undermine all the work that's being and was done on making a
> better,
> > faster resampling library just because someone wants to keep
> compatibility
> > with a dead project.
>
> What you call "dead project" did basically all of the hardware
> transcoding improvements that were merged into ffmpeg. How very
> insincere of you.
>

Didn't mean dead as an offense, just as an honest fact. Have you seen their
ML these past months? 23 times less mails than here just this month. 13
times for the previous month. Similar commits wise.



> > For someone who's complaining about the codebase being full of junk you
> > sure seem lenient towards having 2 resampling libraries and 2 filters to
> do
>
> Had I been around, I'd have prevented libswresample, which was a bad
> NIH of libavresample.
>

Actually it was the opposite, lswr was first and lavr was a NIH which
someone got paid to do. ubitux knows.



> I think you should port all improvements to libavresample, and delete
> the redundant libswresample. But that would be a honest act!
>

I think its more dishonest to try to whatabout about a past merge than it
is to face the truth.
You know what's most honest *and* productive? Constructively pointing out
where lswr sucks, and better yet, sending a patch to improve it.


_______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
>