On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 01:57:06PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> On date Thursday 2011-04-07 00:18:48 +0000, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> > Hi,
> [...]
> > > Another point is that an application may need to implement an ad-hoc
> > > access protocol, this is not an hypotetical need as you can find many
> > > of such requests in the libav-user archive. I can understand that the
> > > API may need to be made hidden for the moment while it is reworked,
> > > but then at some point it will be useful to make the protocol struct
> > > public again.
> > 
> > Let's consider that when a real usecase arises.
> > 
> > The hypothetical "I need a custom protocol" means it's either to embed
> > lavf demuxers in a non-FFmpeg/Libav framework, for which AVIOContext
> > is better suited,
> 
> yes
> 
> > or for stuff that should be inside FFmpeg/Libav anyway.
> 
> No, requirements can be pretty weird these days, you may need to
> access another ad-hoc process, or use a private protocol which is not
> useful enough to be embedded into the framework. This applies to most
> configured elements in FFmpeg/Libav, we implement the stuff which is
> publically useful but there are a lot of ad-hoc components which are
> better implemented at the application level.
> 

The point is, for most of those use cases you don't need access to
URLProtocol, you can implement them on the AVIOContext level.

-- 
Anton Khirnov

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to