[MPlayer-dev-eng] [PATCH] JPEG video output to multiple subdirectories v8

[Diego Biurrun]

Ivo writes:
> On Monday 16 August 2004 15:42, Attila Kinali wrote:
> 
> > Ivo: Would you like to take over the maintenance of vo jpeg ?
> > It could need a maintainer.
> 
> ...added myself to the maintainer file. I'd be happy to be the maintainer 
> from now on. When this patch is committed, I would like to do the 
> following:
> 
> * Clean up the source by changing the indentation. The one-space indentation 
> it has now (and which I respected in my patch) is horrible. Beyond a depth 
> of three it is unreadable. I believe it's common practice to have one patch 
> that does not change any of the code, but only fixes cosmetics. Is that 
> right? Also, what's the preferred indentation for the mplayer sourcecode?

There is no preferred indentation, every maintainer is free to use the
indentation he prefers in his part of the code.

Changing the indentation is OK as long as you _strictly_ separate
cosmetics from real changes.

> * After that, I want vo_jpeg to use the -vo jpeg:options style of passing 
> options. Eventualy, the -jpeg commandline option should be removed. What's 
> the rule on removing commandline options? Keep it for a few months (mention 
> it's deprecated in the manual page) and then remove? Or never remove it for 
> backwards-compatability's sake?

It should be removed from the manual page and the old option should be
replaced with a CONF_TYPE_PRINT that explains about the alternatives.
Just look in cfg-*.h.

And removing the -jpeg command line switch is a very good idea IMHO.

> * Then I might pick up another multiple file output driver and add the same 
> functionality (spread files over multiple directories, implement -vo 
> driver:options, et cetera). Or maybe all multiple file output drivers 
> should be replaced by one meta-driver called vo_mf (analog to mf:// for 
> input). Like: -vo mf:type=jpeg:further_options. What do you think?

Sounds good to me.

Diego