> 在 2017年11月20日,下午9:03,Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> 写道: > > 2017-11-20 9:17 GMT+01:00 刘歧 <l...@chinaffmpeg.org>: >> >>>>> 在 2017年11月20日,15:59,Jeyapal, Karthick <kjeya...@akamai.com> 写道: >>>> >>>>> On 11/20/17, 1:01 PM, "刘歧" <l...@chinaffmpeg.org> wrote: >>>>> 在 2017年11月8日,17:22,Karthick J <kjeya...@akamai.com> 写道: >>>>> + { "http_user_agent", "override User-Agent field in HTTP header", >>>>> OFFSET(user_agent), AV_OPT_TYPE_STRING, {.str = NULL}, 0, 0, E}, >>>> What about dash_user_agent? The reason is http_user_agent maybe get >>>> mean HTTP Protocol user_agent, but this is used in dashenc. >>> >>> I kept http_user_agent to maintain uniformity with hlsenc option. >>> http://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2017-September/215642.html >>> >>> In that way, irrespective of hls or dash output format, http_user_agent >>> would apply for both. >> >> that should modify to hls_user_agent too. because that is clarified the >> option >> is used in dash or hls, isn’t it? > > I consider it a huge advantage for users if options in different modules use > the same option name if they do the same thing. > > Is it possible to create confusion if the options share the same name? for example: -timeout use rtmp or http i cannot understand the timeout is used in tcp or rtmp or http, which protocol will use it? Because there have same option name in tcp and rtmp, I think clear module private option is better.
> > Carl Eugen > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-devel mailing list > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org > http://f _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel