[FFmpeg-devel] [FFmpeg-cvslog] lavf/isom: add Dolby Vision sample entry codes for HEVC and H.264

[Carl Eugen Hoyos]

2018-12-17 22:51 GMT+01:00, Jan Ekström <jeebjp at gmail.com>:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:47 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffmpeg at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> 2018-12-17 22:45 GMT+01:00, Jan Ekström <jeebjp at gmail.com>:
>> > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:36 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffmpeg at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> 2018-12-17 22:27 GMT+01:00, Rodger Combs <git at videolan.org>:
>> >> > ffmpeg | branch: master | Rodger Combs <rodger.combs at gmail.com> | Mon
>> >> > Nov  5
>> >> > 10:26:24 2018 -0600| [6ebe88f3a4c427511eba7495896f4a57a2b4b529] |
>> >> > committer:
>> >> > Jan Ekström
>> >> >
>> >> > lavf/isom: add Dolby Vision sample entry codes for HEVC and H.264
>> >> >
>> >> > These are registered identifiers at the MPEG-4 RA, which are
>> >> > defined as to be utilized for Dolby Vision AVC/HEVC streams that
>> >> > are not correctly presentable by standards-compliant AVC/HEVC
>> >> > players.
>> >> >
>> >> > According to the Dolby Vision specification for ISOBMFF, these sample
>> >> > entry codes are specified to have the standard AVC or HEVC decoder
>> >> > configuration box in addition to the Dolby custom
>> >> > DOVIConfigurationBox.
>> >> > This is what enables us to decode the streams without custom parsing.
>> >> >
>> >> > For correct presentation information from the DOVIConfigurationBox
>> >> > is required (YCbCr or modified ICtCP, SDR or HDR, base or enhancement
>> >> > layer).
>> >>
>> >> This is not only missing a requested mention of the relevant ticket
>> >> where a sample
>> >> for this patch is linked (apparently the only one existing) but also a
>> >> mention of Igor Selivanov who had sent an identical patch to the
>> >> mailing
>> >> list.
>> >>
>> >> Carl Eugen
>> >
>> > Thank you for once, for once actually saying what on earth you want.
>> >
>> > Now please actually mention how do you want the ticket be mentioned.
>> > It is not "fixed" or "fixes" because it cannot be presented without
>> > the colorspace being figured out.
>>
>> I don't understand:
>> Why are you asking this after pushing the objected patch?
>>
>
> Because I had mentioned my opinion, and then you seemingly dropped the
> topic in the following replies, which seemed to me like that was it.
>
> And now that you object, I want to know what you want.

That you mention the ticket that contains a link to the only sample
we know of.
Since the sample cannot be played without your patch but plays
now, I believe you fixed the ticket but if you disagree you could
have written "does not fix ticket ...".

Which of course makes no difference now.

Carl Eugen