On 23/05/2025 15:50, Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> On Fri, 23 May 2025, 04:44 Lynne, <dev@lynne.ee> wrote:
> 
>> On 23/05/2025 08:42, Kieran Kunhya via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I wanted to put on the record that adding RaptorQ to FFmpeg isn't
>>> maintenance of FFmpeg.
>>
>> It isn't -- it's research.
>>> It's adding an obscure FEC protocol to FFmpeg, which is not going to be
>>> implemented well without an event loop anyway.
>>
>> You're mixing up FEC implementation details that don't matter for a
>> library.
>> It works much like a decoder - you put N blocks of Y bytes data in, and
>> you get X blocks of Z byes out.
>>> I do not think it's a suitable STF project.
>> STF is not maintenance-only from what I understand, but also for
>> innovation, in this case, research.
>>
> 
> I point you to the previous thread on FEC where I explained that's a flawed
> design as it causes bursting in a practical protocol.
> 
> You've basically answered the question that your implementation will be
> theoretical and not usable in a real protocol.

Pretty much all implementations share the same underlying API, to the 
point where the protocol almost specifies how a public API would look like.
It isn't a flawed design either, it works differently, so you simply use 
it differently.

I've removed the proposal from the list.
You should consider reading the spec, along with the Raptor spec.