On 1/9/2026 7:32 AM, Nicolas Gaullier via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
> On 1/8/26 08:32, Christophe Gisquet via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
>> Le jeu. 8 janv. 2026, 02:24, mypopy--- via ffmpeg-devel <
>> ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> a écrit :
>>> As James Almer pointed out in his response, the current merge request
>>> has already removed the muxer component, so there won't be any
>>> compatibility issues, even if the specification is still in draft
>>> status.
>>>
>>> AV1 in TS is already being utilized in certain scenarios, and we also
>>> need an implementation to validate this specification concurrently
>> Well, I don't particularly like that argument (flv extension again by 
>> some
>> operator?), but this is beside the point.
> 
> I also don't particularly like that argument, but what I do not 
> understand is why we cannot get a public sample for sharing ?

Kieran is trying to get one.

> 
> It seems to me this demuxer-case should require FF_COMPLIANCE_EXPERIMENTAL.

Why would a demuxer require the user to set that compliance value? 
Muxers i understand, but demuxers? Is there ever any reason you'd not 
want to have it output something it can handle?