[NUT-devel] [nut]: r609 - docs/nutissues.txt

[Michael Niedermayer]

On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 01:13:11PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 01:54:03PM +0100, michael wrote:
> > Author: michael
> > Date: Tue Feb 12 13:54:02 2008
> > New Revision: 609
> > 
> > Log:
> > 3rd option
> > 
> > 
> > Modified:
> >    docs/nutissues.txt
> > 
> > Modified: docs/nutissues.txt
> > ==============================================================================
> > --- docs/nutissues.txt	(original)
> > +++ docs/nutissues.txt	Tue Feb 12 13:54:02 2008
> > @@ -152,6 +152,7 @@ How do we identify the sample format
> >  
> >  A. fourcc
> >  B. extradata
> > +C. New field in the stream header
> >  
> >  
> >  Issue pcm-interleaving
> > @@ -160,3 +161,4 @@ How do we identify the interleaving
> >  
> >  A. fourcc
> >  B. extradata
> > +C. New field in the stream header
> 
> Michael, would you please stop this unprofessional creation of issues?
> The topic was discussed thoroughly on the list somewhere between 2 and
> 4 years ago and it was concluded that a stream header field that just
> applies to a single format (raw pcm) does not belong in the generic
> stream header. Extradata or the format identifier (fourcc) is the
> place for format-specific information. It's not my intent to quiet
> dissent but rather to avert jumping back in time by 3 years or so on
> issues that were already treated thoroughly at the time!

Iam listing all issues which have not been solved and all possble solutions.
You just asked today or yesterday if mpeg had some document about the
reasoning behind some of their decissions.

It would be unprofessional if id simply not list a possible solution because
we maybe decided 2-4 years ago that its not a good choice.
And yes i agree that things just needed for raw dont belong in the stream
header. And IIRC the consensus 2-4 years ago was to use the fourcc though
i dont remember all the reasoning anymore but we had a pretty good
argument, i just dont remember it :)
Now you seem you prefer extradata, after alban suggested it, this is as
close to the consensus 3 years ago as using the stream header.
Besides its one of thee things which would be a nightmare to implement in
practice and would need tons of special case.

If(raw){
    extract all the data out of extradata
    make extradata disapear somehow as its nut specific and not the codec
    private area
}else{
}


[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

There will always be a question for which you do not know the correct awnser.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/nut-devel/attachments/20080212/66ea1a7c/attachment.pgp>