On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:52 AM, wm4 <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 11:25:43 +0100 > Luca Barbato <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 28/10/15 02:45, Vittorio Giovara wrote: >> > imho go for "rawframes", no space like other codes, different from >> >> Changed this way, will hit the tree this night. > > Wrong color. IMHO it's misleading, because it sounds very similar to > rawvideo, without making clear that it's a very special encoder to wrap > AVFrames. This is not just another codec, but a mechanism to pass > through AVFrames, with a very unusual packet format. (It's the only > format that requires you to read pointers to normal memory from packet > data.) > > While I agree that "wrapped_avframe" is not ideal, "rawframes" doesn't > sound very telling. > > I suggest "rawvideo_avframe".
_avframe still exposes libav internals and the point of the patch was to hide them to the cli user. How about keeping rawframes (or rawvideo if you prefer) and editing the category, (internal) instead of (native)? -- Vittorio _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
