[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] doc/developer: merge and update sections about external development

[Timothy Gu]

On Jul 10, 2013 2:50 AM, "Stefano Sabatini" <stefasab at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On date Tuesday 2013-07-09 11:36:55 -0800, Lou Logan encoded:
> > On Fri,  5 Jul 2013 11:07:07 +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> >
> > > ---
> > >  doc/developer.texi | 39 ++++++++++++++++-----------------------
> > >  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/doc/developer.texi b/doc/developer.texi
> > > index 5972d87..dfe3c75 100644
> > > --- a/doc/developer.texi
> > > +++ b/doc/developer.texi
> > > @@ -11,29 +11,22 @@
> > >
> > >  @chapter Developers Guide
> > >
> > > - at section API
> > > - at itemize @bullet
> > > - at item libavcodec is the library containing the codecs (both encoding
and
> > > -decoding). Look at @file{doc/examples/decoding_encoding.c} to see
how to use
> > > -it.
> > > -
> > > - at item libavformat is the library containing the file format handling
(mux and
> > > -demux code for several formats). Look at @file{ffplay.c} to use it
in a
> > > -player. See @file{doc/examples/muxing.c} to use it to generate audio
or video
> > > -streams.
> > > -
> > > - at end itemize
> > > -
> > > - at section Integrating libavcodec or libavformat in your program
> > > -
> > > -You can integrate all the source code of the libraries to link them
> > > -statically to avoid any version problem. All you need is to provide a
> > > -'config.mak' and a 'config.h' in the parent directory. See the
defines
> > > -generated by ./configure to understand what is needed.
> > > -
> > > -You can use libavcodec or libavformat in your commercial program, but
> > > - at emph{any patch you make must be published}. The best way to proceed
is
> > > -to send your patches to the FFmpeg mailing list.
> > > + at section Note for external developers
> > > +
>
> > > +This document is mostly useful for internal FFmpeg developers.
> > > +External developer who need to use the API in their application
should
> >
> > nit: developers, developers, developers, developers...
>
> I don't know what you mean here. I could avoid the second use of
> "developers" using another term (programmers?) but that's enhancing
> confusion for a small questionable stylistical gain.

Plural: developer -> developers

[...]

Timothy