[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfilter: add (a)separate filters

Soft Works softworkz at hotmail.com
Sun Aug 1 21:46:59 EEST 2021



> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces at ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of
> Gyan Doshi
> Sent: Sunday, 1 August 2021 20:40
> To: ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfilter: add (a)separate filters
> 
> 
> 
> On 2021-08-01 23:59, Soft Works wrote:
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces at ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of
> >> Nicolas George
> >> Sent: Sunday, 1 August 2021 19:02
> >> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-
> >> devel at ffmpeg.org>
> >> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfilter: add (a)separate filters
> >>
> >> Paul B Mahol (12021-08-01):
> >>> Signed-off-by: Paul B Mahol <onemda at gmail.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>   doc/filters.texi         |  31 ++++
> >>>   libavfilter/Makefile     |   2 +
> >>>   libavfilter/allfilters.c |   2 +
> >>>   libavfilter/f_separate.c | 346
> >>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>   4 files changed, 381 insertions(+)
> >>>   create mode 100644 libavfilter/f_separate.c
> >> Did not review the code.
> >>
> >> Separate seems the wrong word: afaik, it is to be used when things of
> >> different nature have gotten mixed together.
> >>
> >> Split would be the best choice, and in line with mkvmerge options,
> >> but it is already used.
> >>
> >> Maybe timesplit. Or segment.
> > I think timesplit is a good choice because it would align with the "split"
> > filter which is creating multiple outputs as well.
> > "segment" would cause confusion as there's already the "segment muxer".
> 
> segment is more intuitive because it's a direct match. We already have concat
> as a protocol / demuxer / filter; users will manage.

Maybe segmentsplit ?

sw


More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list