[FFmpeg-devel] [FFmpeg-cvslog] lavf/isom: add Dolby Vision sample entry codes for HEVC and H.264

[Jan Ekström]

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:47 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffmpeg at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 2018-12-17 22:45 GMT+01:00, Jan Ekström <jeebjp at gmail.com>:
> > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:36 PM Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceffmpeg at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> 2018-12-17 22:27 GMT+01:00, Rodger Combs <git at videolan.org>:
> >> > ffmpeg | branch: master | Rodger Combs <rodger.combs at gmail.com> | Mon
> >> > Nov  5
> >> > 10:26:24 2018 -0600| [6ebe88f3a4c427511eba7495896f4a57a2b4b529] |
> >> > committer:
> >> > Jan Ekström
> >> >
> >> > lavf/isom: add Dolby Vision sample entry codes for HEVC and H.264
> >> >
> >> > These are registered identifiers at the MPEG-4 RA, which are
> >> > defined as to be utilized for Dolby Vision AVC/HEVC streams that
> >> > are not correctly presentable by standards-compliant AVC/HEVC players.
> >> >
> >> > According to the Dolby Vision specification for ISOBMFF, these sample
> >> > entry codes are specified to have the standard AVC or HEVC decoder
> >> > configuration box in addition to the Dolby custom DOVIConfigurationBox.
> >> > This is what enables us to decode the streams without custom parsing.
> >> >
> >> > For correct presentation information from the DOVIConfigurationBox
> >> > is required (YCbCr or modified ICtCP, SDR or HDR, base or enhancement
> >> > layer).
> >>
> >> This is not only missing a requested mention of the relevant ticket
> >> where a sample
> >> for this patch is linked (apparently the only one existing) but also a
> >> mention of Igor Selivanov who had sent an identical patch to the mailing
> >> list.
> >>
> >> Carl Eugen
> >
> > Thank you for once, for once actually saying what on earth you want.
> >
> > Now please actually mention how do you want the ticket be mentioned.
> > It is not "fixed" or "fixes" because it cannot be presented without
> > the colorspace being figured out.
>
> I don't understand:
> Why are you asking this after pushing the objected patch?
>

Because I had mentioned my opinion, and then you seemingly dropped the
topic in the following replies, which seemed to me like that was it.

And now that you object, I want to know what you want.

Jan