[Ffmpeg-devel-irc] ffmpeg-devel.log.20190712

[burek]

[08:56:54 CEST] <JEEB> did lavf have a "no AVPackets in X time" sort of thing yet?
[08:57:24 CEST] <JEEB> I only remember rw_timeout which is general I/O
[09:00:37 CEST] <Compn> you mean a message or a feature that waits for input ?
[09:03:18 CEST] <JEEB> means to detect "technically the input is alive, but we couldn't parse anything useful from it in X time". although I'm also not sure if this should be in the API client or in the API :)
[09:03:54 CEST] <JEEB> think of an MPEG-TS input that is still sending in the index, but suddenly no data for any of the PIDs, for example
[09:44:31 CEST] <CyberShadow> Hi
[09:44:31 CEST] <CyberShadow> durandal_1707 Compn: Yes though the user I created it for has since submitted a few examples where the filter wasn't working as well at it could. I had some ideas for how to improve it (make it localized) but ran out of time and got swamped with other projects.
[10:06:39 CEST] <kierank> JEEB: the demux would have to know about time
[10:06:42 CEST] <kierank> which afaik it doesn't
[10:11:38 CEST] <JEEB> or the general lavf packet reading loop, yup
[10:11:46 CEST] <JEEB> (the one within lavf)
[10:11:54 CEST] <JEEB> but yes, most likely not a thing atm
[11:32:22 CEST] <durandal_1707> I NOW HATE ALL ABOUT MULTIMEDIA!
[11:47:42 CEST] <J_Darnley> The only good thing about it is the waifus
[11:47:51 CEST] <JEEB> :D
[11:47:52 CEST] <J_Darnley> If you don't like them then I see your point
[11:49:41 CEST] <kierank> durandal_1707: why
[11:56:25 CEST] <durandal_1707> kierank: leechers everywhere!
[12:05:52 CEST] <kierank> durandal_1707: welcome to open source and the free rider problem
[13:14:11 CEST] <pross> Compn: \O/
[15:00:52 CEST] <durandal_1707> mkver: is there fate code that tests webm_chunk?
[15:02:18 CEST] <mkver> Not that I am aware of. I think I ran fate at the time and if I did, it did pass (otherwise I would have not sent this patch).
[15:19:38 CEST] <cone-410> ffmpeg 03Andreas Rheinhardt 07master:8c6ee7626bcc: lavf/webm_chunk: Fix NULL dereference
[15:19:39 CEST] <cone-410> ffmpeg 03Andreas Rheinhardt 07master:24a64e0462d5: lavf/webm_chunk: Correct duration if start time > 0
[16:27:56 CEST] <Lynne> that svt review is savage
[16:30:02 CEST] <durandal_1707> why?
[16:31:14 CEST] <Lynne> "an embarrassment"
[16:39:24 CEST] <nevcairiel> its not savage if the authors of the project themself say that it just wasnt ready to be published
[16:39:40 CEST] <BBB> to his defense, he's saying his team's work is embarassing him
[16:39:42 CEST] <BBB> I think it's ok
[16:40:02 CEST] <BBB> he's basically saying "please don't review our/my work yet", which is saving us time, not savaging an external contributor
[16:40:07 CEST] <J_Darnley> It is strongly worded but doesn't seem bad
[16:40:23 CEST] <BBB> not very PC, I agree with that
[16:40:28 CEST] <kierank> wow
[16:40:41 CEST] <J_Darnley> Certainly not the worst stuff said in an FFmpeg channel
[16:57:43 CEST] <durandal_1707> why patchwork does not automatically mark pushed patches?
[16:59:08 CEST] <jamrial> "which is to get read and judged by all the experts on FFmpeg community"
[16:59:13 CEST] <jamrial> we have seen worse :p
[17:01:05 CEST] <durandal_1707> mkver: could you list links to patchwork of your matroskadec patches?
[17:02:20 CEST] <durandal_1707> yo' bro' hav' se'n n'th'ng
[17:03:14 CEST] <mkver> It's patches 17-37 of the matroskadec patches here: https://patchwork.ffmpeg.org/project/ffmpeg/list/?submitter=798
[17:03:47 CEST] <mkver> I dpn't know why the state of the already merged ones is still "new".
[17:04:28 CEST] <jamrial> mkver: patchwork looks for keywords in replies to change the status of patches
[17:04:41 CEST] <jamrial> i probably didn't use the correct keywords, or didn't reply to each patch
[17:05:25 CEST] <jamrial> when that happens they need to be changed manually
[17:07:35 CEST] <durandal_1707> mkver: but you have new patch, redo leven handling
[17:09:21 CEST] <mkver> If you mean by this that this patch does not apply 100% cleanly any more, but needs a three-way-merge, then that's because of eb33be188d2acb99e8f0f6a5cb45c931ed947cd0.
[17:09:33 CEST] <jamrial> durandal_1707: that's patch 23 updated after a change in a previous patch generated conflicts
[17:11:40 CEST] <durandal_1707> we should switch to github PR
[17:12:04 CEST] <mkver> Why?
[17:12:28 CEST] <durandal_1707> easier to apply multiple patches in a row
[17:12:29 CEST] <JEEB> durandal_1707: for us more likely would be videolan's gitlab
[17:13:21 CEST] <jamrial> i would be fine with that
[17:22:26 CEST] <mkver> Who's actually in charge of patchwork? I have already tried to register myself there, but some error (I don't remember which one) appeared and now my email and my preferred name is already taken, but when I try to login, I get a "This account is inactive" message. (When I use a different password, I get an incorrect password error, so I really remember my chosen password.)
[17:24:02 CEST] <kierank> durandal_1707: nice troll
[17:44:19 CEST] <durandal_1707> mkver: perhaps you need to activate it somehow?
[17:46:05 CEST] <durandal_1707> kierank: you are jealous
[17:46:19 CEST] <kierank> durandal_1707: why, I use github myself
[17:47:40 CEST] <mkver> durandal_1707: If only I knew how...
[18:06:46 CEST] <Lynne> google seem to have abandoned webm, no av1 spec
[18:07:32 CEST] <JEEB> I think they only utilized webm where they didn't specify mp4 mappings first
[18:07:43 CEST] <JEEB> as soon as you get mp4 you get DRM support etc
[18:09:29 CEST] <Lynne> I'm glad annexb av1 hasn't caught on though
[18:14:22 CEST] <jamrial> Lynne: webm av1 mapping is the same as matroska
[18:15:23 CEST] <jamrial> which is based on the mp4 one. so av1C in codecprivate, no temporal delimiter obus in block data, etc
[18:15:52 CEST] <jamrial> but yes, google moved to mp4. they also seemingly abandoned webp
[18:16:34 CEST] <J_Darnley> They couldn't get anyone to adopt it meaning no Embrace, Extend, Extinguish
[18:16:52 CEST] <Lynne> its not officially supported though, or at least the website hasn't been updated
[18:18:08 CEST] <jamrial> libaom generates webms using the matroska spec, so it's official enough :p
[18:19:12 CEST] <jamrial> J_Darnley: Windows 10 v1903 and Firefox both added support for webp
[18:20:04 CEST] <J_Darnley> maybe so but did they convince anyone else to embrace it?  users/creators in particular?
[18:20:25 CEST] <J_Darnley> Google might have the direction of the "Embrace" action backwards.
[18:20:30 CEST] <Lynne> nope, youtube only
[18:20:50 CEST] <jamrial> some content providers did
[18:21:09 CEST] <jamrial> serving webp if supported instead of jpg/png
[18:21:32 CEST] <jamrial> saved them some bandwidth, but pissed off users when they couldn't do anything with the images they saved from the page :p
[18:22:11 CEST] <J_Darnley> Unintentional DRM?  Excellent
[18:22:12 CEST] <Lynne> also probably bought the 50% size savings from google and starve the images
[18:27:02 CEST] <J_Darnley> I wonder if I can blame a combination of that and idiot mobile users for all the low quality images I see
[18:37:00 CEST] <Lynne> I wonder if you can somehow match up something written in the av1 spec with the avif spec such that insane tiling would be contradictory and unsupported
[19:30:04 CEST] <durandal_1707> war of intel clones
[21:32:24 CEST] <cone-624> ffmpeg 03Marton Balint 07master:397abca001c8: avformat/movenc: use unspecified language by default
[21:32:24 CEST] <cone-624> ffmpeg 03Marton Balint 07master:81d3d7dd44ac: avformat/mpegts: respect program number when merging streams
[22:56:55 CEST] <Compn> durandal_1707,  "<CyberShadow> durandal_1707 Compn: Yes though the user I created it for has since submitted a few examples where the filter wasn't working as well at it could. I had some ideas for how to improve it (make it localized) but ran out of time and got swamped with other projects."
[23:27:53 CEST] <Compn> doh\
[23:28:13 CEST] <Compn> michaelni, you can test the photosensitive filter, the results are visually easy to spot
[23:29:55 CEST] <Compn> to answer a question no one asked, there is no exact known flashing light frequency that causes a seizure. filtered sunlight is commonly used i believe. there have been some experiments with 120hz vs 50hz flashing lights but it has not been studied
[23:30:13 CEST] <Compn> mostly because its not morally great to test seizures on people.
[23:58:45 CEST] <Compn> michaelni,  a good test for the photosensitive filter would be to see if it visually distorts when it shouldnt. e.g. run it on known clips to see how badly it affects them
[00:00:00 CEST] --- Sat Jul 13 2019