[FFmpeg-devel] lavfi state of affairs
Tue Feb 3 03:17:15 CET 2009
On Mon, Feb 02, 2009 at 05:32:47PM -0800, Baptiste Coudurier wrote:
> Hi Stefano,
> Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> > On date Wednesday 2009-01-21 20:50:48 +0100, Stefano Sabatini encoded:
> >> On date Tuesday 2009-01-20 09:37:21 +0100, V?ctor Paesa encoded:
> >>> Hi,
> >>> Stefano Sabatini said:
> >>>> On date Monday 2009-01-19 21:04:13 -0800, Baptiste Coudurier encoded:
> > [...]
> >>>>> How is the situation, concerning full integration in svn ?
> >>>>> How useable the filters are ? I mean the situation seems to work for
> >>>>> you, and in many way it seems to be at least better than the current
> >>>>> vhook implementation. What's left for the merge ?
> >>>> The main issues is to fix the regression tests for ffmpeg, YUV tests
> >>>> seem to break regression, I still didn't investigate on it, mainly
> >>>> because I'm lazy and write filters is so much fun ;-).
> > [...]
> >> Do you have any hint regarding what could be the cause of it?
> > With the help of Vitor I discovered that the scale filter was using
> > different flags for the scaler, the attached patch, which is not meant
> > to be reviewed, fixes regression.
> Ok, nice, so what's left ? We need to drop vhook seriously, it really
> slow everyone down :>
you have my approval to drop/disable/svn rm vhook
Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
If a bugfix only changes things apparently unrelated to the bug with no
further explanation, that is a good sign that the bugfix is wrong.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the ffmpeg-devel