On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Steven Liu <l...@chinaffmpeg.org> wrote:
>> 在 2017年11月20日,下午10:03,Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffm...@gmail.com> 写道:
>> 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?
> It’s used for dash, isn’t it clear than http_user_agent? If not use -f dash, 
> just only use http_user_agent, what will happen, I think that will get 
> confusion, because hls have the same name, looks like timeout option.

If two components have the same option that does exactly the same
thing, it should also be named the same. Especially if those two
components are also quite similar - ie. two streaming protocol

- Hendrik
ffmpeg-devel mailing list

Reply via email to