On 2014/12/29 22:10, Clément Bœsch wrote:
I hope you understand that this patch is likely to get rejected for several
reasons. Here is a (probably) non exhaustive list:
- There are still some license uncertainties about the licensing (see
"die_license_disabled nonfree nvenc" in the configure)
- Having both libnvenc and nvenc is not viable. The users will be
confused and a mess to maintain.
If you want to replace nvenc by your code, make it support the same
options as current nvenc (to not break compatibility), same name, and a
feature equivalent or superset.
The other solution being to patch our nvenc with the feature you want
to add. And yes, NVIDIA will still have some visibility on this, you
will be able to add yourself as maintainers for the file and in the
Copyright header, if that's your company's concern.
- You add many private unused options to make it "compatible" with a
libx264 command line. This is messy; private options mean what they
are, specific to the encoder.
- Coding style is broken, you have many tabs, trailing whitespaces, ...
Agatha Hu
Regards,
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
Yes we plan to work on base of nvenc.c, libnvenc.patch is sent for
comparison.
Agatha Hu
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
