-----Original Message----- From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Lynne Sent: sobota, 18 marca 2023 18:53 To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> Cc: 'FFmpeg development discussions and patches' <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v14 9/9] avcodec/evc: Changes in Changelog and MAINTAINERS files
Mar 6, 2023, 11:46 by d.kozinski@samsung.com:
-----Original Message----- From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Lynne Sent: wtorek, 14 lutego 2023 19:01 To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v14 9/9] avcodec/evc: Changes in Changelog and MAINTAINERS files
Feb 14, 2023, 13:10 by d.kozinski@samsung.com:
-----Original Message----- From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Lynne Sent: poniedziałek, 13 lutego 2023 18:32 To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v14 9/9] avcodec/evc: Changes in Changelog and MAINTAINERS files
Feb 13, 2023, 10:29 by d.kozinski@samsung.com:
Lynne, if it concerns us, we will comply with both the current and the new maintainership policy once your patchset is pushed. We see that your change has not yet been pushed into the main branch, and it appears that the discussion on this topic may still be ongoing, although both Michael and other maintainers have reviewed and commented on
it.
What do you mean both current and new policy?
Lynne, you mentioned a new policy change on maintainership in one of the previous emails: "I assign myself to personally review the patchset and push it, if you review my policy change on maintainership. As I said, I have no objection on who gets maintainership, just that it is done explicitly via a separate list in the maintainers file."
Fair enough, I'll just review the patchset while ignoring this patch.
Dear Lynne,
I just wanted to timidly remind you that we are still waiting for a review of our
code.
Please have mercy on us and don't let us wait for ages. We don't want to wait indefinitely, and we would like to move forward with our project.
Ping, I sent a review of the patchset more than a week ago, could you look into fixing the issues? Like I said in my review, the issues aren't huge, just some cleanups and timebase/timestamp issues.
Thank you very much for the review. I will definitely upload new patchset this week. I apologize for the delay in my response, but I found an issue in the code that I had to track down and fix. BTW. The problem turned out to be related to the timestamps you mentioned in your review. I have fixed everything, except for one thing. I'm not entirely sure how should I handle the following request "You should handle avctx->flags & AV_CODEC_FLAG_GLOBAL_HEADER. If that flag is set, you have to set avctx->extradata to (usually, in case of h2645) at least the start SPS unit, or whatever the standard is for containers." Could you please provide me with more information on this? How should I handle the case(when the AV_CODEC_FLAG_GLOBAL_HEADER flag is set for the AVCodecContext? Should I put the content of this NAL unit into FFCodec::extradata if the encoder produces an SPS NAL unit during stream encoding? (In the case when the AV_CODEC_FLAG_GLOBAL_HEADER flag is set for the AVCodecContext the FOO flag is set ofcourse) What is the purpose of doing so? How is FFCodec::extradata used later on? How does the framework know what is inside it?" Thank you for your time Dawid
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=661a13b8-079106a1-661b98f7- 74fe485cbfec-2bea90a8a418d5f0&q=1&e=3896e17c-e77c-43cf-9daf- 0d05df9057e1&u=https%3A%2F%2Fffmpeg.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fffmp eg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".