[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] Subtitle Filtering Ramp-Up

[softworkz .]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ffmpeg-devel <ffmpeg-devel-bounces at ffmpeg.org> On Behalf Of Hendrik
> Leppkes
> Sent: Dienstag, 3. Juni 2025 20:02
> To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches <ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org>
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] Subtitle Filtering Ramp-Up
> 
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 4:21 PM softworkz .
> <softworkz-at-hotmail.com at ffmpeg.org> wrote:
> >
> > Making it explicit now in the form of the AVSubtitleFlowMode enum
> > provides a number of benefits:
> >
> > - It finally provides an understandable explanation for why those two
> >   extra timing fields are needed
> >
> 
> You say that, but I don't see that at all. In 3 of your 4 cases, the
> two sets of fields seem to be close to identical with no good reason
> to be separate, and the 4th case is an implementation detail that is
> being forced into the API.

Hello Hendrik,

thanks a lot for your opinion.

Do you know what I think what the problem is?


Talk is cheap but work is hard!
-------------------------------

I understand very well how you (and some others) are thinking - and 
that's totally plausible and looks good on paper.
But what I can tell you for sure: It will never go to work out 
like that. It might work for some specific cases at best, but you
will never be able to achieve - not even come close to the 
versatility of my work. 


I have an offer to make to FFmpeg, which provides a very wide 
variety of WELL WORKING subtitle filtering scenarios.
It has proven to work over 3 years on hundreds of thousands
machines which are making intensive use of FFmpeg in an 
abundance of different ways, on all platforms you can think 
of and with almost all hw accelerations that FFmpeg supports.


And you want to talk up big and tell me how wrong it is?

I know very well what I'm doing and why I'm doing it that way.
And when you think about it, you should easily come to the 
conclusion that if I really wouldn't know what I'm doing,
then I had agreed long ago already to your suggestions.
But these do not work out, I'm afraid. It's as simple as that.

I also think that everybody knows that nobody else will come 
in the next 10 years and that NG won't accomplish anything 
either, as he's telling to work on this since 10 or 15 years
already and nothing has happened. It's a damn huge amount 
of work, I can tell you, and nobody else will come.


We can talk about and work out details if there's interest.
But I don't have the same amount of time as last time, 
neither enough patience.

I think it's probably best to let the TC make a final
decision right away. Those discussions aren't worth
repeating.

I say you are wrong. You say the same.
But I'm the one who has worked this through to the 
very end. You not. 

Best regards
sw