2017-11-20 15:00 GMT+01:00 Steven Liu <l...@chinaffmpeg.org>: > > >> 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?
Sorry for the bad wording: Is it possible for "http_user_agent" to create confusion because options with this name are used in different demuxers? Carl Eugen _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel