Hi, Jean-Michel Pour? wrote: > I saw a couple of patches in FFmpeg SVN. Were all your changes committed > to SVN. Testing latest FFmpeg, I still have seeking issues (garbled > Unfortunately not. Just a few small things were committed to SVN.
> image). What is the status of your patch in FFmpeg svn? > Both frame combining for interlaced video (or some other solution) and seeking issues are still outstanding. It's extremely hard to argument (the developers there are very rude and the critics is by no means constructive; I feel extremely unwelcome there) and it takes forever to get a patch through. My patches do have some deficiencies and don't address 100% of the issues or address them differently than FFmpeg developers wish and thus won't get accepted in this way. Partial solutions (even if they don't break anything) won't be accepted, unfortunately, only 100% solutions. The reason is to prevent code base pollution with hacks, which must be removed later when adding the proper solution (which is also a valid argument, but OTOH the code in that area is full of such hacks...). Since my daughter (first child) was born a week ago, my time for open-source development approaches zero. So I'm unsure what will happen. I'm quite sure it won't be all fixed until the release of FFmpeg on 21.2.2009. I can definitely provide a complete patch against latest FFmpeg to handle AVCHD, so in worst case, you can give it to MLT developers and let them build FFmpeg statically with the patch. OTOH, MLT has also some bugs in libavformat handler, most prominently off-by-two frames for MPEG-2 and H.264 (and possibly other codecs) as well as wrong usage of av_read_frame(), which can be attributed to deficient documentation. If correct solution for AVCHD is built into FFmpeg, MLT has to be fixed as well. Regards, Ivan
