[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Create a libavutil/pix_fmt.h with the pixel format stuff

[Michael Niedermayer]

On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:33:32AM +0100, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> On date Saturday 2009-02-21 18:10:25 +0100, Michael Niedermayer encoded:
> > On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 05:57:01PM +0100, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> > > On date Saturday 2009-02-21 16:41:24 +0100, Michael Niedermayer encoded:
> > > > On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 04:32:47PM +0100, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> [...]
> > > > > She (the user) was used to do:
> > > > > #include <libavutil/avutil.h>
> > > > > 
> > > > > while after the change she will do:
> > > > > #include <libavutil/pix_fmt.h>
> > > > 
> > > > She still can and should do #include <libavutil/avutil.h>
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > and get done with the pix fmt stuff inclusion, so she may do:
> > > > > #if (LIBAVUTIL_VERSION_MINOR < X)
> > > > > #include <libavutil/avutil.h>
> > > > > #else
> > > > > #include <libavutil/pix_fmt.h>
> > > > > #endif
> > > > 
> > > > well ...
> > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Note that this currently doesn't make sense, since
> > > > 
> > > > great one line summary ...
> > > > ive not seen pix_fmt as a header the end user would want to include directly
> > > > rather as "internal but installed" header to factorize our code.
> > > > thus IMHO it wouldnt need a bump ...
> > > > also fewer headers -> less compexity
> > > > i know its trivial for us now but each additional (and useless so) header
> > > > makes it more complex for the user ...
> > > 
> > > I see your point, but how the user is supposed to understand if an
> > > header has to be considered "internal but installed"?
> > 
> > normally
> > * user reads docs
> > * docs say which header for which function
> > 
> > we have no docs except the headers ....
> 
> Added a warning notice in the file description, note also that this is
> currently the only installed header we have.
> 
> Anyway, if this is the direction we choose then no need to update
> minor version, if we decide in the future to make that header public,
> we still can remove that notice and bump it.
> 
> I also renamed the file pixfmt.h as preferred by Mans.

looks ok

[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

It is not what we do, but why we do it that matters.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/attachments/20090222/51706092/attachment.pgp>