Billy Biggs wrote:

>   I think you're right though.  Instead of doing a libv4l that nobody
>would use, we should work on having lots of libs with inconsistent
>interfaces, but at least the code would be shared.
>

How about a minimal libv4l with a consistent interface for the other 
libraries to "plug in" to? That way, libv4l would provide a standard 
mechanism without enforcing the "policy" of a particular deinterlacer, 
scaler, etc...

-- 
Mark McClelland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]





_______________________________________________
Video4linux-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/video4linux-list

Reply via email to