Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v4 2/4] mpegts: Stash original PTS for SCTE-35 sections for processing later

From: Kieran Kunhya <kierank@obe.tv>
To: Devin Heitmueller <devin.heitmueller@ltnglobal.com>
Cc: Devin Heitmueller <dheitmueller@ltnglobal.com>,
	FFmpeg development discussions and patches
	<ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>
Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH v4 2/4] mpegts: Stash original PTS for SCTE-35 sections for processing later
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2023 08:41:59 -0400
Message-ID: <CAK+ULv6Yf18jJgeje5_8q7mNRz2oPHqyBBs8GynD5v-npDTK=g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHGibzFE4OuOBxiWaEgxy-cLHZZuVJcV1iY2NmXDz1CUPnUxpA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, 10 Aug 2023 at 08:20, Devin Heitmueller <
devin.heitmueller@ltnglobal.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 8:13 AM Kieran Kunhya <kierank@obe.tv> wrote:
> > The (closest?) video PTS is even worse than the last PCR because the VBV
> means the closest PTS can be quite far from the interpolated PCR.
>
> It's arguments like that which prompted me to explicitly exclude such
> a patch from the series.  It's a discussion to be had, but not
> relevant for this patch series (which makes no effort to change the
> logic for how the timestamp is determined).
>
> Wait until such a patch is submitted, and then we can debate at length
> the ambiguity in the specification and what the best approach is.
>

There is zero ambiguity in the specification.

Kieran
_______________________________________________
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".