On Sun, 22 May 2011, Gil Pedersen wrote:

> I'm just stating how it looks at the moment, and I agree that several of 
> the mp4box options could be implemented quite easily in libav. Other 
> options, like interleaving and fast start, will require more substantial 
> changes to the movenc muxer since they can't be realized using the 
> current implementation. Ie. you need to create a temporary file and 
> write everything to disk twice for it to be viable. I don't know if this 
> is in the pipeline for libav. For my purposes I don't need RTP hinting 
> anymore, but a fast start option would be very welcome.

Yes, faststart still has to be done externally (although that doesn't have 
anything to do with RTP hinting).

> > If someone has a concrete usecase where some other parameter needs to be 
> > adjusted, where the default isn't ok, we can of course try to make that 
> > configurable, as we're discussing with the LATM case right now.
> 
> Sure, this sounds nice, but most people who look at the tools will see 
> that many already recommend a combination of ffmpeg and mp4box and 
> likely decide to use that. It's a very limited audience that will know 
> you are listening and have time to wait for the features to be 
> implemented.

Yeah, and it's understandable that few know about it since it's quite new, 
while mp4box has been around for a long time.

As for few knowing that we're willing to fix things if they ask for it - I 
guess it's how most of the development happens here - we implement things 
once there is a concrete need/usecase. The code in its current form works 
just fine for my use cases at least, allowing me to simplify my dependency 
chain significantly, getting rid of mp4box.

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

Reply via email to