[MPlayer-dev-eng] [PATCH] mkv: use sh_sub_t argument instead of mkv_track_t where possible

[Aurelien Jacobs]

On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 22:32:16 +0200
Reimar Döffinger <Reimar.Doeffinger at stud.uni-karlsruhe.de> wrote:

> Hello,
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 10:24:38PM +0200, Aurelien Jacobs wrote:
> > On Sat, 23 Jun 2007 19:06:21 +0200
> > Reimar Döffinger <Reimar.Doeffinger at stud.uni-karlsruhe.de> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 07:55:23PM +0200, Aurelien Jacobs wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 18:36:08 +0200
> > > > Reimar Döffinger <Reimar.Doeffinger at stud.uni-karlsruhe.de> wrote:
> > > > > attached patch removes some useless clutter in the form of "t->" and
> > > > > makes it also easier to fix how demuxer->sub->sh is set (it should be
> > > > > set to one of the pointers in s_streams not malloc, esp. when it never
> > > > > gets freed).
> > > > > It also makes it easier to see what kind of "side effects" the functions
> > > > > have.
> > > > 
> > > > This looks fine to me.
> > > 
> > > Applied, and a bugfix right afterwards.
> > > Have you answered just out of interest or did you somehow become
> > > maintainer for mkv demuxer? If so, please fix MAINTAINERS accordingly...
> > 
> > No, I'm not interested in becoming maintainer for this demuxer.
> > I'm more interested by the lavf implementation.
> > But as the original author of this demuxer, I still keep an eye on it.
> 
> "maintainer" has multiple meanings. I mean if everyone agrees (which I
> now think we do) that you can ok patches for it I'd be for adding a
> statement saying so to MAINTAINERS. Nobody expects you to spend much
> time on it because of that (MAINTAINERS is so well hidden for a reason).
> But it is of course your decision.

Well, if you think I can OK patches (I suppose I can), then fine,
I will add myself as maintainer. But don't expect me to do anything
more than reviewing patches.

Aurel