[FFmpeg-user] ffprobe documentation seems mixed up with ffmpeg docs

Peter B. pb at das-werkstatt.com
Mon Aug 13 00:10:23 CEST 2012

On 08/09/2012 09:26 AM, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> Anyway I don't think removing those includes from ffprobe.texi would
> be acceptable for the above mentioned reasons.
I understand.

What about pointing to the parts of ffmpeg's docs instead of including them?

I might be talking too superficial here, but if I am not the only one
who finds it rather confusing to have the ffmpeg syntax mentioned
without any additional note within the ffprobe docs, what about
mentioning your above listed explanations shortly and then point to
ffmpeg's doc where necessary. Then it'd be clear why these sections
appear in ffprobe.

If so many parts are shared between ffmpeg and ffprobe (which is
understandable), it might be a bad idea to copy text-parts (=fork) the
ffprobe docs just in order to adapt the text there so it better suits
ffprobe's syntax and use cases.

There are ffmpeg conversions shown as examples, which is something that
is absolutely undoable using ffprobe.
Examples: AVOptions [1], Codec AVOptions [2] or Syntax:Color [3].



== References:
[1] http://ffmpeg.org/ffprobe.html#AVOptions
[2] http://ffmpeg.org/ffprobe.html#Codec-AVOptions
[3] http://ffmpeg.org/ffprobe.html#Color

More information about the ffmpeg-user mailing list