From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ffbox0-bg.ffmpeg.org (ffbox0-bg.ffmpeg.org [79.124.17.100]) by master.gitmailbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F5104AF2E for ; Wed, 21 May 2025 07:29:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.1.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ffbox0-bg.ffmpeg.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBCC668CBCD; Wed, 21 May 2025 10:29:05 +0300 (EEST) Received: from mail.treehouse.org.za (mail.treehouse.org.za [116.202.197.4]) by ffbox0-bg.ffmpeg.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6672F68CB09 for ; Wed, 21 May 2025 10:28:59 +0300 (EEST) Received: from [2c0f:ef18:1827:0:a41e:58be:135d:e436] by mail.treehouse.org.za with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256 (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1uHdso-00000003rG6-2jTf; Wed, 21 May 2025 07:28:58 +0000 Message-ID: To: "softworkz ." , FFmpeg development discussions and patches Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 09:28:54 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Evolution 3.52.3-0ubuntu1 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Accept a colon in the path of a URI, instead of stripping preceding characters. X-BeenThere: ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: FFmpeg development discussions and patches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Timothy Allen via ffmpeg-devel Reply-To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches Cc: Timothy Allen Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org Sender: "ffmpeg-devel" Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Post: On Tue, 2025-05-20 at 20:03 +0000, softworkz . wrote: > I was just about to reply and suggest to replace those colons with > %3A > (url-encoded) when I read the ticket, which already suggests that. > > Have you tried it? It sounds like a much better way to me. I think this would be a common-sense solution as long as one controls the server/content. The reason I submitted the patch anyway was because not everyone will control the content they're consuming, and because, although I acknowledge it technically breaks RFCs, there is an argument that the RFC's behaviour is surprising; we can certainly see that other applications (Safari, in the linked ticket) break the RFC as well. I can certainly understand if the patch is rejected -- even if it didn't break the RFC, Postel's Law is not in vogue any longer. However, I think the workflows that it might break ("host:port", with no scheme or path) are much less obvious and intuitive than the workflows that it rescues. Regardless of the decision, thanks for reviewing the patch! Best, Tim _______________________________________________ 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".