[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 1/2] avcodec: Add interface to motion estimation
Carl Eugen Hoyos
cehoyos at ag.or.at
Mon Aug 31 14:40:32 CEST 2015
Ronald S. Bultje <rsbultje <at> gmail.com> writes:
> > If this were all true, why don't you fork FFmpeg
> > and show us how it's done better?
Sorry, I thought you would understand the joke (and
that this was no argument) without any tags.
(Particularly with the word following...)
> > Seriously: No matter which fair I visit, the users
> > always tell the same story. They liked avconv
> > because it promised so many things that could be
> > improved in FFmpeg and quickly switched, but in
> > the end they had to switch back to FFmpeg: Not
> > necessarily because of the bugs (they could
> > backport the fixes) but because of the missing
> > APIs (like VDPAU).
> > I mean of course this all sounds incredibly
> > promising and while I found it far too good to be
> > true when you originally suggested it I couldn't
> > know for sure - after all, you could have been
> > right and succeed with the promises made. But why
> > you are still suggesting the same thing after
> > four years of undeniable proof that it is not
> > working is beyond me...
> You're suggesting "Libav went down *because* they
> tried to clean up the API", instead of "...
> *despite* ...". You provide no evidence for this
I did mention the (library!) users who have told
me so face-to-face.
This is of course no proof (but evidence), the
alternative explanation currently discussed (that
it was only me black-mailing people) seems less
likely though (although very flattering).
> > I really don't understand why we don't spend
> > the time fixing real (user-reported) issues
> > instead of discussing how "clean" an api can
> > be...
> Because the two are not mutually exclusive.
I still believe that time is the limiting factor
in FFmpeg development, your statement is not
completely true therefore (unfortunately!).
More information about the ffmpeg-devel