On Sat, Nov 04, 2023 at 04:22:11PM +0000, Derek Buitenhuis wrote:
[...]
> I am almost certain I missed even more nuance, and hopefully Martin or Anton can chime in, or I remember more.
> 
> But also, given all of this, I think we need to deeply consider how we approach this, so we don't end up with
> something that only covers certain cases (and I am sure I forgot more cases). To that end, I do not think rushing
> to get a patchset that can change sync on all AAC files in existence into 6.1 is wise. Even when this does go in,
> it should be able to sit in master for a good long time before being in a release. As I understand it, FATE is
> already unhappy, and it shouldn't be treated as being a problem with FATE vs the set.
> 

> Lastly, some time this weekend/week, I will labour to create a more extensive set of AAC files we can use to
> test, and use in FATE.

I think thats a very good idea.
Ideally we would have a set of test samples encoded with all major encoders
samples where start, end and sync can be easily determined unambigously

once we have such a set, it becomes easy to check that we get the start/end/sync
right for every file by default.

I think the guiding principle should be that what comes out of the decoder is
as close to what went into the encoder. And of course to comply to specifications


>
> Hope that all made sense and I didn't forget any details in my Covid-induced haze.

i hope you get better soon!

thx

[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad
people will find a way around the laws. -- Plato