[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v2] movenc: Add an option for hiding fragments at the end

[Gyan Doshi]

On 2024-06-15 03:54 am, Dennis Sädtler via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> On 2024-06-14 13:23, Gyan Doshi wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2024-06-14 04:35 pm, Timo Rothenpieler wrote:
>>> On 14/06/2024 12:44, Martin Storsjö wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 14 Jun 2024, Gyan Doshi wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2024-06-14 02:18 am, Martin Storsjö wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 13 Jun 2024, Gyan Doshi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2024-06-13 06:20 pm, Martin Storsjö wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd otherwise want to push this, but I'm not entirely satisfied 
>>>>>>>> with the option name quite yet. I'm pondering if we should call 
>>>>>>>> it "hybrid_fragmented" - any opinions, Dennis or Timo?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How about `resilient_mode` or `recoverable`?
>>>>>>> I agree that the how is secondary.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Those are good suggestions as well - but I think I prefer 
>>>>>> "hybrid_fragmented" still.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In theory, I guess one could implement resilient writing in a 
>>>>>> number of different ways, whereas the hybrid 
>>>>>> fragmented/non-fragmented only is one.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So with a couple other voices agreeing with the name 
>>>>>> "hybrid_fragmented", I'll post a new patch with the option in 
>>>>>> that form - hopefully you don't object to it.
>>>>>
>>>>> The term hybrid is not applicable here. The fragmented state is 
>>>>> transient during writing and contingent in the finished artifact 
>>>>> depending on how the writing process concluded.
>>>>> Hybrid implies both modes available e.g.. a hybrid vehicle can use 
>>>>> both types of energy sources. The artifact here will be one _or_ 
>>>>> the other.
>>>>
>>>> Sure, the file itself is either or, but the process of writing will 
>>>> have utilized both. TBH, I don't see it as such a black-or-white 
>>>> thing.
>>>>
>>>> What do the others who have chimed in on the thread think, compared 
>>>> to calling it "recoverable" or "resilient_mode"?
>>>
>>> I don't have a super strong opinion on it, but out of the options 
>>> provided, I'd prefer the hybrid_ one, since there's a good chance 
>>> it'll become an established term now that OBS presents it quite 
>>> publicly visible.
>>
>> The OBS dev intends to change the term:
>>
>> "Come up with a better name than "Hybrid MP4" that hopefully won't 
>> confuse users"
>> https://github.com/obsproject/obs-studio/pull/10608#issuecomment-2095222024 
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Gyan
>
> Now that it's merged and in the hands of users I don't have any 
> intention of changing the name any more.
> We had some chats about about it, but nobody suggested anything that 
> people agreed was better, so it stuck.
>
> While "resilient" certainly fits, it could equally apply to regular 
> fragmented MP4 (e.g. vMix uses that terminology for fMP4 if I'm not 
> mistaken).
> The important attribute with this approach is that it's resilient 
> *and* compatible, and I'm still not sure how to get that across in 
> name alone.

How about `failsafe`?

Regards,
Gyan