I've made some patches, and am finally getting around to sending them upstream.
I'm trying out gmail for dealing with a high-traffic list like this one, instead of my usual mutt. Are the one-line-paragraph long lines it's probably going to produce an annoyance for anyone? I didn't notice anything about line lengths in emails in https://www.ffmpeg.org/developer.html I put in pull requests on github for 4 different branches. Should I send email to the list for each set of patches? Should I git-send-email, or is a mail with a URL for the github pull request enough? (Or is just a pull request enough? developer.html seems to say that sending a pull request is an alternative to mailing patches to the list.) Anyway, the av_dict change is the one that requires the most review, so I'll make this email focus on that set of changes. https://github.com/FFmpeg/FFmpeg/pull/118 Currently, -x264-params nocabac:ref=4:ssim isn't supported. You have to say nocabac=1:ref=4:ssim=1 (or cabac=0...). (and yes, I know about -preset, but superfast no-cabac is useful... anyway.) Also, libx265.c is very minimal, and needs a lot of things passed in -x265-params. I didn't fix that, but did make it support keys with no value. libx264 has two different ways of passing option strings (-x264-params and -x264opts), due to avconv gratuitously renaming things. The insane part is that the two strings were parsed differently. One was handled by av_dict, the other with some custom code that didn't support quoting. In my x26x-opts branch (which follows the av_dict branch), I add both option strings to the same av_dict. (x264opts and then x264-params, in that order, regardless of order on the command line, same as before). I don't think it's ever useful to use the same key multiple times. Tune only works as -tune ssim, not in x264-params, and you can use a comma-separated list for -tune animation,ssim. There was a previous attempt at keys with no value that didn't get merged: http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2013-July/146329.html I should borrow the idea of adding a new flag for supporting NULL as a value, instead of the cumbersome empty-string method I went with to minimize changes to some parts of the code. Having a flag would make sure the behaviour didn't change for any callers that weren't expecting it. (i.e. it would still reject key:key). So are any of these changes useful? I assume I'll end up redoing the commits anyway after a review, so I didn't try to make a final ready-for-commit version yet. (For that, I would merge the bugfix changes into my original buggy commit.) For review, I'd suggest looking at the diff of master:av_dict. The 3 commits after that changing libx264.c and libx265.c should each stand on their own. (And actually the libx264.c one should be split into a couple commits.) Anyway, I wanted to post first and get some feedback before spending more time on it. Thanks, -- Peter Cordes <pe...@cordes.ca> _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
