On 12/14/2018 5:22 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
Not directly related to this issue but please note that two issues were reported against FFmpeg over the last years where the samples were >10G, so this comment is neither correct nor does it give the right incentives imo.
My comment is quite correct and on-point. If the artifacts _can_ be shown in a single frame or a short clip there's no reason to _not_ to provide those, and that doesn't preclude _also_ making larger files available (inclusive OR, not exclusive OR).
Having smaller samples available actually widens the group of people willing look at them; not everyone has gigabit Ethernet to their home or office, some of us have considerably slower 'net connections and we're not as likely to download a large file but will look at the frames and shorter clips. (Please do me the courtesy of not disagreeing with that as it directly states my position and that of some fellow engineers.)
(We love samples.)
We do, well, I do, although large samples are not always necessary, or even desirable (if 5MB shows the problem, why include 200MB?). Log files need the same handling- make the full log available but also excerpt the relevant parts so people don't need to wade through thousands of lines looking for the two that are useful. If some folks don't want to look at the excepts, they don't have to, but some of us will.
z! _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list ffmpeg-user@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-user-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
