On date Saturday 2011-07-30 13:36:41 +0200, Luca Barbato encoded: > On 7/30/11 1:25 PM, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > >On date Saturday 2011-07-30 12:13:48 +0200, Luca Barbato encoded: > >>On 7/29/11 8:03 PM, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > >>>If you want to rename the tools just do them consistent: > >>>avprobe > >>>avplay > >>>so the pattern here is av+VERB > >>> > >>>avconvert/avmux is consistent with this pattern, avconvert looks a > >>>more intuitive name. > >> > >>I'd rather name it just "av" the name is available and the shorter > >>the better. I do agree that avconv/avconvert is more intuitive but > >>mux seems to cover better what av.c should provide. > >
> >av => unexplicative > > I know, but gives you the idea "does stuff on audio video" like "ip" > does stuff on the ip protocol. "does stuff on audio video", it applies to all the other tools as well. > >avmux => the tool muxes, but it's not the only thing that the tool > >does, "avconvert" explicates better what the tool does (convert A/V/S > >streams). > > Indeed both cover just a side of it. > > >On the same ground, maybe ffserver => av+stream, "server" doesn't tell > >what the tool does. > > avserver tells us that the program serves audio/video so might still > be easy to get. My point was also about the fact that "avserver" doesn't match the av+VERB pattern. ... I'm used to follow these naming rules, and I'm usually satisfied with whatever respects them: 1. use meaningful names (possibly meaningful even out-of-context) 2. use globally consistent names (that is, design a common scheme and try to follow it) 3. adopt a namespace-resolution method when conflicts may arise 4. favor shorter names, or easier to read/speech/remember/type, when more options are available Of course you're free to ignore my comments. _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
