[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Rename input/outdev symbols in libavdevice

[Diego Biurrun]

On Fri, Jul 03, 2009 at 12:47:25AM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> On date Thursday 2009-07-02 23:12:23 +0200, Michael Niedermayer encoded:
> > On Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 10:17:36PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> > > On date Wednesday 2009-07-01 12:51:24 +0200, Michael Niedermayer encoded:
> > > > On Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 01:07:20AM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> > > > > On date Monday 2009-06-29 22:01:02 +0200, Stefano Sabatini encoded:
> > > > > > On date Monday 2009-06-29 21:13:36 +0200, Luca Abeni encoded:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> > > > > > >> Hi, as in subject.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Not that I care, but I think this was proposed when
> > > > > > > libavdevice has been created, but it was rejected.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Do you remember the reasons for which it was rejected?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Appears to me a quite natural change...
> > > > > 
> > > > > Ping.
> > > > 
> > > > i for one do not remember why such a change was rejected in the past if it
> > > > was so ...
> > > 
> > > Uh, after some digging in the archive I found this:
> > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video.ffmpeg.devel/59644/focus=59789
> > > 
> > > |Diego:
> > > |> Which renames?  If it is about the format registration I disagree,
> > > |> calling the input/output devices (de)muxers is suboptimal.
> > > |
> > > |Michael:
> > > |they ARE (de)muxers, implement them as URLProtocol if you like but
> > > |as long as they are demuxers they should be called demuxers
> > > 
> > > Yet I can't figure this out, as for me they just look like devices...
> > 
> > hmm
> > what about indev_demuxer and such ?
> 
> Honestly, that look very confusing, I'd rather prefer to keep their
> current names.

I still prever indev/outdev..

Diego