[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v2] movenc: Add an option for hiding fragments at the end

[Martin Storsjö]

On Sat, 15 Jun 2024, Gyan Doshi wrote:

> On 2024-06-15 03:54 am, Dennis Sädtler via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
>> On 2024-06-14 13:23, Gyan Doshi wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2024-06-14 04:35 pm, Timo Rothenpieler wrote:
>>>> On 14/06/2024 12:44, Martin Storsjö wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 14 Jun 2024, Gyan Doshi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2024-06-14 02:18 am, Martin Storsjö wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, 13 Jun 2024, Gyan Doshi wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2024-06-13 06:20 pm, Martin Storsjö wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'd otherwise want to push this, but I'm not entirely satisfied 
>>>>>>>>> with the option name quite yet. I'm pondering if we should call 
>>>>>>>>> it "hybrid_fragmented" - any opinions, Dennis or Timo?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How about `resilient_mode` or `recoverable`?
>>>>>>>> I agree that the how is secondary.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Those are good suggestions as well - but I think I prefer 
>>>>>>> "hybrid_fragmented" still.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In theory, I guess one could implement resilient writing in a 
>>>>>>> number of different ways, whereas the hybrid 
>>>>>>> fragmented/non-fragmented only is one.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So with a couple other voices agreeing with the name 
>>>>>>> "hybrid_fragmented", I'll post a new patch with the option in 
>>>>>>> that form - hopefully you don't object to it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The term hybrid is not applicable here. The fragmented state is 
>>>>>> transient during writing and contingent in the finished artifact 
>>>>>> depending on how the writing process concluded.
>>>>>> Hybrid implies both modes available e.g.. a hybrid vehicle can use 
>>>>>> both types of energy sources. The artifact here will be one _or_ 
>>>>>> the other.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sure, the file itself is either or, but the process of writing will 
>>>>> have utilized both. TBH, I don't see it as such a black-or-white 
>>>>> thing.
>>>>>
>>>>> What do the others who have chimed in on the thread think, compared 
>>>>> to calling it "recoverable" or "resilient_mode"?
>>>>
>>>> I don't have a super strong opinion on it, but out of the options 
>>>> provided, I'd prefer the hybrid_ one, since there's a good chance 
>>>> it'll become an established term now that OBS presents it quite 
>>>> publicly visible.
>>>
>>> The OBS dev intends to change the term:
>>>
>>> "Come up with a better name than "Hybrid MP4" that hopefully won't 
>>> confuse users"
>>> 
> https://github.com/obsproject/obs-studio/pull/10608#issuecomment-2095222024 
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Gyan
>>
>> Now that it's merged and in the hands of users I don't have any 
>> intention of changing the name any more.
>> We had some chats about about it, but nobody suggested anything that 
>> people agreed was better, so it stuck.
>>
>> While "resilient" certainly fits, it could equally apply to regular 
>> fragmented MP4 (e.g. vMix uses that terminology for fMP4 if I'm not 
>> mistaken).
>> The important attribute with this approach is that it's resilient 
>> *and* compatible, and I'm still not sure how to get that across in 
>> name alone.
>
> How about `failsafe`?

I don't see how that differs from "resilient", as a regular fragmented 
file also is failsafe (or resilient) in the same way - while the special 
thing here is that it's both fragmented and not.

// Martin