Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] ipfsgateway: Remove default gateway

[Michael Niedermayer <michael@niedermayer.cc>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3504 bytes --]

On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 10:18:04PM +0100, Kieran Kunhya wrote:
> >
> > for libxml2 these problems are less likely to hit us as we likely never
> > need a
> > "new xml feature" but for a (de)muxer we quite likely will need the
> > latests version on every platform.
> > Also we have regression tests, external libs make that impossible
> > as the version of external libs can change the behavior. Again this
> > is a issue for mxf maybe less so libxml. You can also see that we have no
> > tests involving  any of the external encoder libs, for that very reason.
> > With each external lib that is needed for core features this would
> > become a quickly growing problem
> >
> >
> 
> Going back to technical arguments instead of utopian pipedreams (replacing
> YouTube and Tiktok lol). 

Well, who would have dreamt that humans will be able to fly ?
Maybe if the worlds best engineers and scientists and alot of capital was used
That where the Wright brothers, no actually it was not. The smartest people
with most degrees and alot of governemnt funding was a competing team that
i dont even remember the name of. The Wright Brothers had no degrees and
funded their stuff from the revenue of their bicycle shop

Or maybe create a free OS. That linux pipedream
Or maybe reverse engeneering all codecs and writing free implementations?
You know many of the people who did that yourself. Another pipedream

Or editing the human genome maybe, you know when you start with a single
celled embryo you can, wait no. There actually are a few people who had
the majority of their liver cells gen-edited in vivo as adults long after
their birth, to treat a rare desease called ATTR amyloidosis

...

Now maybe it will always stay a pipedream that all the evil sozial media
and communication platforms get replaced by privacy preserving, free speech
respecting, non adverziser controlled things. Quite possible, even quite likely
Then again maybe someone, maybe Elon Musk with twitter will take a bite
out of these giants. I have no clue.
My point was just that this sort of stuff would fit into FFmpegs mission
if somone wanted to do it. Its something id be happy to support.


> You will never fit all the features of complex
> containers like MXF, MP4, TS (and for argument's sake XML) inside a
> generalised framework like FFmpeg.

Maybe true but the reason is not that it cant be dont just that there are
features noone uses and noone needs.
I do know some video codec specs and there are bizare things in them that
arent worth the paper they are written on.
The features that are used or that people need, we must support IMO.


> 
> Likewise with dav1d, we have seen that an external lib has allowed them to
> introduced new paradigms such as mixed frame and sliced threads without
> having to redo the whole framework of dozens of codecs. There is value to
> this. There are also a lot of modern codec features which aren't easily
> fittable into FFmpeg such as dependent substreams.

The framework has, will and must evolve. Theres alot thats different between
FFmpeg 10 years ago and today.
External libs wont fix that btw. If the framework doesnt handle feature X
then it also doesnt with an external lib. User apps using the framework have
the problem both ways.

thx

[...]

-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Those who are best at talking, realize last or never when they are wrong.

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 251 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".