Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of FFmeeting/2014-01

Oct 1, 2014, 6:51:36 AM (5 years ago)



  • FFmeeting/2014-01

    v1 v1  
     1This FFmeeting was hosted on on January 11, 2014, at 16 UTC.
     3==Pre-scheduled topic==
     51. technical issues, TODOs, long term projects
     62. crowdfunding, donation system improvements, merchandising etc.
     73. development task proposals
     84. miscellanea
     10==Full meeting log==
     13**** BEGIN LOGGING AT Sat Jan 11 14:53:47 2014
     15Jan 11 14:53:47 *       Now talking on #ffmpeg-meeting
     16Jan 11 14:53:48 * sets mode +n #ffmpeg-meeting
     17Jan 11 14:53:48 * sets mode +s #ffmpeg-meeting
     18Jan 11 14:55:26 *       BBB (~rbultje <at> has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     19Jan 11 14:58:54 *       Compn (~notabot <at> has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     20Jan 11 14:59:02 <Compn> how many hours til it starts again ?
     21Jan 11 15:01:32 *       ubitux (~ux <at> has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     22Jan 11 15:08:22 *       michaelni (~michael <at> has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     23Jan 11 15:12:26 <michaelni>     saste, do we have some list of topics for the meeting today ? if so maybe link to it in the /topic
     24Jan 11 15:31:31 *       easyfab (~chatzilla <at> has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     25Jan 11 15:31:39 *       easyfab (~chatzilla <at> has left #ffmpeg-meeting
     26Jan 11 15:34:24 *       easyfab (~chatzilla <at> has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     27Jan 11 15:35:36 *       kriegerod (~krieger <at> has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     28Jan 11 15:35:41 *       beastd (~Akero7 <at> has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     29Jan 11 15:36:08 <beastd>        hi all. sorry i misremembered the time to be an hour later :(
     30Jan 11 15:40:09 *       wm4 (~wm4 <at> has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     31Jan 11 15:42:12 *       nevcairiel (quassel <at> WoWUIDev/WoWAce/Ace3/nevcairiel) has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     32Jan 11 15:42:31 <michaelni>     saste, please add "this channel is publically logged in the topic" to the topic, i think IIRC thats supposed to be there for such channels
     33Jan 11 15:42:52 <michaelni>     s/ in the topic//
     34Jan 11 15:43:14 *       kurosu_ (5545746f <at> gateway/web/freenode/ip. has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     35Jan 11 15:49:43 *       cbsrobot_ (~cbsrobot <at> has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     36Jan 11 15:49:49 *       cbsrobot_ has quit (Client Quit)
     37Jan 11 15:50:11 *       cbsrobot_ (~cbsrobot <at> has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     38Jan 11 16:07:41 *       saste has changed the topic to: The meeting will begin at 16 UTC - this channel is publically logged
     39Jan 11 16:07:59 <saste> michaelni, done
     40Jan 11 16:08:26 <michaelni>     thx
     41Jan 11 16:17:08 *       Topic for #ffmpeg-meeting is: The meeting will begin at 16 UTC - this channel is publically logged
     42Jan 11 16:17:08 *       Topic for #ffmpeg-meeting set by saste!~saste___ <at> at Sat Jan 11 16:07:41 2014
     43Jan 11 16:17:17 *       smarter (~smarter <at> ubuntu/member/smarter) has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     44Jan 11 16:18:14 *       saste has changed the topic to: The meeting will begin at 16 UTC - Topics: - This channel is publically logged, the log will be published on ffmpeg-devel
     45Jan 11 16:31:08 *       kurosu_ has quit (Quit: Page closed)
     46Jan 11 16:49:23 *       Cigaes (cigaes <at> has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     47Jan 11 16:50:12 *       Timothy_Gu (~Timothy_G <at> has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     48Jan 11 16:53:08 *       Eventh- (5f22de4b <at> gateway/web/freenode/ip. has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     49Jan 11 16:54:31 <saste> 5 minutes to go
     50Jan 11 16:58:26 *       rmklp (~krueger <at> has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     51Jan 11 16:59:43 *       pross-au (~xbmc <at> has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     52Jan 11 17:00:53 *       j-b (~jb <at> videolan/developer/j-b) has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     53Jan 11 17:02:17 <saste> hi all, thanks for joining
     54Jan 11 17:02:25 <saste> i think it is time to start
     55Jan 11 17:02:52 <saste> you can find the list of topics here:
     56Jan 11 17:03:16 <saste> first topic: 1. technical issues, TODOs, long term projects
     57Jan 11 17:03:30 <saste> who wants to start?
     58Jan 11 17:05:18 <kriegerod>     maybe the one who added this item to list?
     59Jan 11 17:05:51 <saste> i have a list of topics left from the previous meeting, nothing specifically i want to discuss
     60Jan 11 17:06:12 <kriegerod>     seems others are idle, too
     61Jan 11 17:06:14 <pross-au>      re long term stuff. are there any such projects active atm?
     62Jan 11 17:06:17 <saste> there were some devs who wanted to talk about some technical issues, but i think they are missing
     63Jan 11 17:06:31 <michaelni>     i wanted to ask beastd& lou about the status of backups (i think thats technical
     64Jan 11 17:06:36 <michaelni>     but lou isnt here
     65Jan 11 17:06:36 <saste> from the list in the previous meeting:
     66Jan 11 17:06:40 <saste> 1. mpegts/H.264 muxing/timestamp issues
     67Jan 11 17:06:54 <saste> 2.  playlist design issues and issues related to chained muxers option passing
     68Jan 11 17:07:04 <saste> 3.  ffserver generic issues
     69Jan 11 17:07:17 <saste> 4. ffserver RTMP/HLS missing output support
     70Jan 11 17:07:26 <saste> btw anyone interested in working with ffserver?
     71Jan 11 17:07:52 <wm4>   I thought everyone hated ffserver and wanted to remove it
     72Jan 11 17:08:13 <michaelni>     i like ffserver but my todo is too long to really work on it
     73Jan 11 17:08:20 <saste> i did some documentation/cleanup work on ffserver, it's not as bad as I thought
     74Jan 11 17:08:24 <Cigaes>        ffserver is useful. Removing something useful just because nobody wants to maintain it is not something to do.
     75Jan 11 17:08:36 <saste> most open tickets can be easily reproduced
     76Jan 11 17:08:42 <wm4>   then it'll have to continue sucking, I guess
     77Jan 11 17:08:46 <kriegerod>     i could, but cannot afford doing anything such unpaid
     78Jan 11 17:09:10 <saste> the network problem I talkled about on list, I couldn't still resolve it
     79Jan 11 17:09:28 <ubitux>        i'd like to know what's going on with fate btw
     80Jan 11 17:09:38 <ubitux>        didn't someone planed some stuff about it?
     81Jan 11 17:09:40 <saste> ffserver could be the object of some crowdfunding campaign, we can talk about it later
     82Jan 11 17:09:52 <saste> ubitux, what's the problem with fate?
     83Jan 11 17:10:20 <ubitux>        i remember michaelni wanting someone to maintain it/upgrade our fate
     84Jan 11 17:10:32 <ubitux>        maybe related to recent security issues
     85Jan 11 17:10:39 <saste> is baptiste still maintaining fate?
     86Jan 11 17:10:58 *       saste knows nothing about the recent security issues
     87Jan 11 17:11:17 <michaelni>     cross site scripting, no real issue AFAIK
     88Jan 11 17:11:24 <saste> any news about the re-styling burek was working on?
     89Jan 11 17:12:19 <michaelni>     but even if its not a real issue a volunteer to maintain the fateserver code would be great to have
     90Jan 11 17:12:31 <saste> michaelni, what needs to be done?
     91Jan 11 17:12:45 <saste> in other words, what the volunteer is supposed to do specifically?
     92Jan 11 17:13:05 <michaelni>     update it to the latest of mans code and have time to fix&debug any thing that goes wrong
     93Jan 11 17:13:22 <saste> any taker?
     94Jan 11 17:13:23 <michaelni>     and then if the cross site scripting issue is still there, fix it
     95Jan 11 17:15:38 <michaelni>     "fix&debug any thing that goes wrong" == "anything that goes wrong because of the update"
     96Jan 11 17:16:08 <saste> michaelni, where the fate source code can be found?
     97Jan 11 17:16:27 <saste> should we advertise it on the website/download page?
     98Jan 11 17:16:59 <michaelni>     ours at / git://
     99Jan 11 17:17:17 <saste> is it listed on the download page?
     100Jan 11 17:17:17 <Compn> ask mans if you link to mans' repo of course
     101Jan 11 17:18:11 <michaelni>     saste, seems not listed
     102Jan 11 17:18:17 <Compn> it would also be neat if we added the ffmpeg header page to fate page, if possible
     103Jan 11 17:18:26 <Compn> so people can get back to ffmpeg homepage? maybe?
     104Jan 11 17:18:30 <saste> nor could i find the link in doc/fate.texi
     105Jan 11 17:18:49 <saste> Compn, yes
     106Jan 11 17:18:51 <michaelni>     does someone take notes of these todo things ?
     107Jan 11 17:19:12 <saste> currently the FATE interface is rather "spartan"
     108Jan 11 17:19:30 <saste> michaelni, we have a TODO file and trac
     109Jan 11 17:19:48 <saste> no TODO was killed IIRC
     110Jan 11 17:20:17 <michaelni>     i meant someone should make a list of todo items from this meeting, maybe open trac tickets for each
     111Jan 11 17:21:29 <saste> michaelni, i can send a patch to add FATE source repo to the download page
     112Jan 11 17:21:54 <saste> anyway, so far for point 1.  technical issues, TODOs, long term projects
     113Jan 11 17:22:10 <beastd>        TODO file inside source repo is often not useful in my experience. tracking things in one or more tickets usually works better.
     114Jan 11 17:22:13 <michaelni>     saste, ok for patch
     115Jan 11 17:22:28 <saste> anyone wants to discuss his TODO/long term projects?
     116Jan 11 17:22:47 <saste> beastd, TODO was removed for that reason indeed
     117Jan 11 17:23:01 <Cigaes>        beastd: I agree, but there should be a link to "all open TODO tickets" easily accessible, for anyone wanting to work on something.
     118Jan 11 17:23:26 <saste> Cigaes, TODO list = enhancements?
     119Jan 11 17:23:28 <beastd>        Cigaes: that should be done with a report
     120Jan 11 17:23:49 <saste> BTW there is a reason for the "wish" priority on trac?
     121Jan 11 17:24:18 <saste> I don't think "wish" is a priority", anyway that's not a very important issue and should probably not discussed here
     122Jan 11 17:24:48 <Cigaes>        saste: yes, something like that. But possibly only enhancements deemed worthy enough by... enough competent people.
     123Jan 11 17:25:13 <saste> anyway i'd prefer to remove that priority level (indeed an enhancement can have several priority levels)
     124Jan 11 17:25:42 <michaelni>     we could add a todo keyword for these and a report for tickets with that keyword could be linke dto
     125Jan 11 17:26:08 <saste> Cigaes, enhancements tickets can be reviewed and edited by competent developers
     126Jan 11 17:26:11 <Compn> michaelni : after the meeting we will collect ideas and make bug reports, yes
     127Jan 11 17:26:17 <kriegerod>     a list of all unresolved tickets can be considered a TODO
     128Jan 11 17:26:29 *       Compn backlogged
     129Jan 11 17:26:45 <kriegerod>     what's strict criteria for inclusion of ticket to TODO category?
     130Jan 11 17:27:00 <saste> any ticket is a TODO
     131Jan 11 17:27:04 <kriegerod>     project infracstructure related?
     132Jan 11 17:27:04 <Compn> do we need strict criteria ? :P
     133Jan 11 17:27:15 <saste> but there are some tickets which are more important than others
     134Jan 11 17:27:31 <saste> "todo" as a tag is misleading imo
     135Jan 11 17:27:42 <kriegerod>     ok, so TODO = critical level tickets
     136Jan 11 17:27:56 <Cigaes>        saste: there are also tickets that are more demanding than other.
     137Jan 11 17:28:13 <Compn> difficulty and importance
     138Jan 11 17:28:14 <beastd>        maybe the idea from michaelni is quite pragmatic. we could tag things with todo and list all tickets tagged todo with
     139Jan 11 17:28:18 *       Compn runs from the bikeshed
     140Jan 11 17:29:02 <saste> discussion slided from discussion about todos to discussion about what is "todo" ;)
     141Jan 11 17:29:47 <beastd>        yes, which ist the hardest part. but some fuzzy solution could be sufficient
     142Jan 11 17:29:59 <Cigaes>        beastd: this looks like a good solution, provided the "todo" tag is not added by a wandering user for their own whims.
     143Jan 11 17:30:28 <michaelni>     wandering users prefer to mark their tickets as critical
     144Jan 11 17:30:32 <saste> beastd, btw what about a difficulty level or tag in trac?
     145Jan 11 17:31:00 <saste> so wannabee ffdevs (assuming there are some) can easily spot the easy tickets to work on
     146Jan 11 17:31:31 <michaelni>     small age of a ticket might work for this too btw
     147Jan 11 17:31:38 <michaelni>     old tickets tend to be harder
     148Jan 11 17:32:14 <kriegerod>     ...or less important
     149Jan 11 17:32:34 <michaelni>     yes
     150Jan 11 17:32:52 <saste> Cigaes, what's the status of the lavd probing API?
     151Jan 11 17:33:24 <saste> is lukasz still working on it or is it blocked for some reason?
     152Jan 11 17:33:38 <beastd>        saste: dfficulty can be done. either we add a new custom ticket field or now with tags. we would need on a convention either way
     153Jan 11 17:33:43 <Cigaes>        saste: that was more Lukasz's work. I did not have personal communication with him.
     154Jan 11 17:33:54 <saste> Cigaes, ok
     155Jan 11 17:34:27 <saste> so far for what concerns point 1. technical issues, TODOs, long term projects
     156Jan 11 17:34:38 <saste> ?
     157Jan 11 17:35:08 <saste> do we have comments from external users?
     158Jan 11 17:35:30 <Cigaes>        I can mention the few items I have in my personal TODO list, if anyone is interested.
     159Jan 11 17:35:38 <saste> Cigaes, go on
     160Jan 11 17:35:57 <Cigaes>        I have started working on frame-accurate EDL.
     161Jan 11 17:36:23 <saste> status?
     162Jan 11 17:36:24 <Cigaes>        For now, it works without threads but not at all with threads. I am a bit stuck there, but I had no time to really investigate the issue yet.
     163Jan 11 17:37:22 <Compn> so you can seek to a frame number ?
     164Jan 11 17:37:29 <Compn> thats a highly requested feature
     165Jan 11 17:37:30 <ubitux>        what about the subtitles charset thing?
     166Jan 11 17:37:46 <Compn> Cigaes : even without threads support it would be useful ...
     167Jan 11 17:37:47 <ubitux>        Cigaes: i think at least wm4 holds a grudge about your plan
     168Jan 11 17:37:57 <Cigaes>        Compn: to a timestamp. But for now only in selected muxers.
     169Jan 11 17:38:02 <Compn> ah
     170Jan 11 17:38:28 <ubitux>        in the subtitles charset project i'm mainly interested in the utf-16 supports
     171Jan 11 17:38:33 <Cigaes>        ubitux: I am still convinced that his plan do not work at all.
     172Jan 11 17:38:35 <ubitux>        i think that's what mpv is expecting the most
     173Jan 11 17:39:00 <Compn> rather hear what vlc wants charset wise
     174Jan 11 17:39:07 <Compn> j-b : what charsets does vlc require ?
     175Jan 11 17:39:11 <Cigaes>        ... but I am not motivated for arguing the issue.
     176Jan 11 17:39:12 <Compn> for subs
     177Jan 11 17:39:38 <ubitux>        Cigaes: question is, do you have some WIP and plans about it?
     178Jan 11 17:39:55 <j-b>   Compn: none. We support everything. We prefer that the decoder outputs UTF-8, of course, but it does not matter.
     179Jan 11 17:40:23 <j-b>   Compn: iconv is a hard dependency of vlccore.
     180Jan 11 17:40:23 <Cigaes>        ubitux: all I have WIP was posted on the mailing-list a long time ago and buried under bikeshedding.
     181Jan 11 17:40:49 <michaelni>     Cigaes, ubitux my main concern with the "charset issue" is that it appeared deadlocked with noone working on it
     182Jan 11 17:41:07 <ubitux>        ok
     183Jan 11 17:41:48 <michaelni>     Cigaes, or said diferently it appeared IIRC that noone wanted to work on your design and you also where too busy
     184Jan 11 17:41:55 <Cigaes>        I am willing to work on it, but I can not progress if the only voice on the ML says I am doing wrong.
     185Jan 11 17:42:43 <michaelni>     its difficult for me ATM to argue about it as iam a bit unprepared and half forgot the details of the "charset issue"
     186Jan 11 17:43:28 *       cbsrobot_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
     187Jan 11 17:43:53 <Cigaes>        I can try to write a summary about the status of the thing on the mailing list.
     188Jan 11 17:44:44 <saste> Cigaes, or you ping people if you need someone to review/comment on your work
     189Jan 11 17:44:48 <saste> that sometimes work
     190Jan 11 17:45:18 <saste> other medium/long term projects were mentioned in the previous meeting:
     191Jan 11 17:45:20 <michaelni>     what i remember and that may be unrelated actually is that i felt it would be nice if decoders/demuxers could return subtitles without knowing the charset and leaving it to players to detect/interpret the text
     192Jan 11 17:45:24 <Cigaes>        saste: I will see if there are pingable pending mails.
     193Jan 11 17:45:32 <saste> 1. remaining mp filters port
     194Jan 11 17:45:43 <saste> 2. language binding creation (through SWIG or similar)
     195Jan 11 17:45:51 <michaelni>     Cigaes, and yes, a summary would be nice, it would be a pitty if the thing is deadlocked in bikeshed
     196Jan 11 17:45:52 <saste> 3. high level API creation
     197Jan 11 17:46:03 <saste> 4.  EDL support
     198Jan 11 17:46:20 <beastd>        I have another proposal for TODO
     199Jan 11 17:47:05 <beastd>        concerning ffmpeg CLI there is the frequent need to concatenate files. ffmpeg has gotten much better in doing it, but at least we lack a simple-to-use user interface. (short term the faq entry should be rewritten once more.) Long/mid term would be designing and implementing a user interface in ffmpeg to allow for easy concatenation.
     200Jan 11 17:47:08 <Cigaes>        saste: is 4 what I was talking abut a bit earlier.
     201Jan 11 17:47:45 <michaelni>     beastd, this sounds related to playlists
     202Jan 11 17:47:49 <saste> Cigaes, yes I noticed
     203Jan 11 17:47:56 <beastd>        it is something users frequently do. a start would be someone thinking about a design and sending it as RFC to ffmpeg-devel ML
     204Jan 11 17:48:05 <beastd>        michaelni: could be related
     205Jan 11 17:48:12 <Compn> beastd : make it as easy as multiple files with mencoder ?
     206Jan 11 17:48:21 <michaelni>     beastd, if you could specify a list of files to play then you basically have concatenation
     207Jan 11 17:48:23 <wm4>   about subtitles, yes, the only thing that's missing is utf-16 support
     208Jan 11 17:48:32 <Compn> we need playlist support :)
     209Jan 11 17:49:08 <ubitux>        what do you mean by "playlist support"? don't we support already various playlists?
     210Jan 11 17:49:10 <Compn> wm4 : do we have rar subs support? (playing files in rars or rar'd vobsubs) ?
     211Jan 11 17:49:21 <wm4>   no
     212Jan 11 17:49:24 <Cigaes>        Compn: we already have a lot of playlist formats support,
     213Jan 11 17:49:24 <kriegerod>     beastd, i think there's a class of existing apps that do that. Maybe we could google them up and highlight on some page? Anyway GUI tends to be standalone, that's different from "doing it by ffmpeg"
     214Jan 11 17:49:25 <saste> about playlist, can't the concat demuxer be extended to support more playlist formats?
     215Jan 11 17:49:37 <wm4>   I know mplayer contains some extremely hideous code to invoke unrar on the fly
     216Jan 11 17:49:38 <Cigaes>        just no consistent way of validating access to other files.
     217Jan 11 17:49:43 <Compn> saste : there was a patch in 2009 for that playlist api
     218Jan 11 17:49:59 <saste> Compn, was that work on Anton?
     219Jan 11 17:50:04 <Compn> no
     220Jan 11 17:50:05 <beastd>        kriegerod: true, we should look at other implementations
     221Jan 11 17:50:06 <wm4>   playlist parsers (as demuxers) would be nice
     222Jan 11 17:50:06 <Compn> geza iirc
     223Jan 11 17:50:10 <saste> we had a GSOC at some point, maybe it was after the fork
     224Jan 11 17:50:13 <Compn> but i dont know who did original patch
     225Jan 11 17:50:25 <Compn> someone said anton was working on it , but ... i dont see anything
     226Jan 11 17:50:37 <nevcairiel>    Antons GSOC was playlist support, before the fork, but it never really went anywhere :d
     227Jan 11 17:50:53 <Cigaes>        The concat demuxer can only work for files with very similar characteristics.
     228Jan 11 17:51:12 <Cigaes>        With "playlist support", users may want to mix very different files.
     229Jan 11 17:51:26 <Compn> saste / ubitux / Cigaes :
     230Jan 11 17:51:40 <Compn> is the patch from 2009
     231Jan 11 17:52:47 <ubitux>        i'd better have ordered chapters in mkv…
     232Jan 11 17:52:52 <Compn> i dont know if its the right thing.
     233Jan 11 17:52:59 <saste> ah: ffmpeg -conc -i audio1,audio2,audio3 audiofull
     234Jan 11 17:53:02 <Compn> right api or whatever. at least its something
     235Jan 11 17:53:06 <j-b>   I still have bounties for FFmpeg, btw, notably on DTS-HD and AAC-encoder
     236Jan 11 17:53:12 <saste> seems what beastd  was talking about
     237Jan 11 17:53:40 <saste> about AAC encoding, any news from the epic ticket's guys?
     238Jan 11 17:53:43 <wm4>   ubitux: all what's needed is exporting the ordered chapters info
     239Jan 11 17:53:52 <Compn> saste : well, i think beastd wants ffmpeg concat to be as easy as mencoders' multiple file support.
     240Jan 11 17:53:59 <Cigaes>        (the "-conc -i 1,3,3" syntax looks like it will lead to yet another level of escaping madness)
     241Jan 11 17:54:00 <ubitux>        wm4: don't we already?
     242Jan 11 17:54:05 <wm4>   ubitux: no
     243Jan 11 17:54:09 <ubitux>        maybe not enough information in the chapters?
     244Jan 11 17:54:25 <wm4>   I doubt it
     245Jan 11 17:54:26 *       llogan (~llogan <at> pdpc/supporter/student/pasteeater) has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     246Jan 11 17:54:33 <Compn> lou is here :)
     247Jan 11 17:54:46 <wm4>   and you need a nice/fast way to scan for segment files too
     248Jan 11 17:54:53 <llogan>        ok. now we can start....
     249Jan 11 17:55:05 <nevcairiel>    even if the information was exported, i'm not sure you could make it play ordered chapter files seamlessly without a lot of magic in user code as well
     250Jan 11 17:55:10 <wm4>   also, what's so hard about concatenating arbitrary files?
     251Jan 11 17:55:10 <Compn> wm4 : whats mplayer2's mkv ordered chapter support look like ?
     252Jan 11 17:55:22 <llogan>        i forgot i was -9 UTC...not -8. damn it
     253Jan 11 17:55:27 <Cigaes>        nevcairiel: can ordered chapters point to files with different codecs?
     254Jan 11 17:55:29 <beastd>        i think my concern was captured closely enough. and IIRC mencoder has a rather intuitive interface for concat but lots of other problems. anyway extending the CLI syntax can be very challenging
     255Jan 11 17:55:31 <ubitux>        wm4: AVChapter seems to have id, timestamps, and metadata
     256Jan 11 17:55:44 <ubitux>        and our mkv demuxer seems to create them
     257Jan 11 17:55:53 <saste> beastd, mind to show an example?
     258Jan 11 17:56:03 <nevcairiel>    Cigaes: the spec doesnt necessarily disallow it, but it doesnt work in any implementation today, so...
     259Jan 11 17:56:04 <saste> (about the mencoder syntax)
     260Jan 11 17:56:25 <wm4>   ubitux: does it export segment id? does it support editions in any way?
     261Jan 11 17:56:26 <nevcairiel>    (the "spec" really doesn't define many details about the whole process)
     262Jan 11 17:56:44 <ubitux>        wm4: i can't tell, sorry
     263Jan 11 17:56:45 <wm4>   also, ordered chapters are an abomination
     264Jan 11 17:56:52 <wm4>   (just saying)
     265Jan 11 17:57:05 <Compn> saste : mencoder -vf scale=640:480 file1.rm file2.avi file3.mpg -oac lavc -ovc xvid -o file.avi  , will make one output file , all the same resolution and codec. its very easy to hand write , no escaping command lines, no brackets or commas...
     266Jan 11 17:57:07 <ubitux>        it's somehow related to the mov edit list btw
     267Jan 11 17:57:08 <Cigaes>        nevcairiel: then it looks like what I am implementing in the concat demuxer;
     268Jan 11 17:57:12 <nevcairiel>    its not that terrible, at least it wouldnt be if it was documented somewhere
     269Jan 11 17:57:27 <Cigaes>        for now it is a proof of concept, but once it is done it can be shared with other formats.
     270Jan 11 17:57:28 <michaelni>     llogan, beastd when the concat/playlist discussion finishes, can you update us on the server backup status ? (i think we still need a system that does full backups of both our servers and each time sends on email or so to either ML or root so we notice if something makes it stop working)
     271Jan 11 17:57:40 <nevcairiel>    trying to reverse engineer how haalis thing handles certain weird files was annoying =p
     272Jan 11 17:58:24 <wm4>   Compn: yeah, I never understood why weird fragile things like the concat demuxer are needed...
     273Jan 11 17:58:33 <Compn> right
     274Jan 11 17:59:50 <saste> wm4, concat demuxer was needed, at least until we don't have proper playlist support
     275Jan 11 18:00:10 <wm4>   so you admit it was a hack because ffmpeg.c is too much of a hack?
     276Jan 11 18:00:28 <beastd>        Please pardon me. Will need to leave in now.
     277Jan 11 18:00:51 <saste> wm4, it makes sense to implement it as a component for library users, not only for ffmpeg.c
     278Jan 11 18:01:17 <wm4>   I myself am annoyed that a demuxer might suddenly open random files I didn't ask it to open
     279Jan 11 18:01:28 <wm4>   it might even be a security issue
     280Jan 11 18:01:34 <Compn> what demuxer does that wm4 ?
     281Jan 11 18:01:41 <wm4>   Compn: concat
     282Jan 11 18:01:48 <saste> wm4, you can disable it from the build if it annoys you
     283Jan 11 18:01:52 <Compn> i mean, how would that happen wm4 ?
     284Jan 11 18:02:03 <kriegerod>     what's wrong with concat demuxer? it does its job in specific required manner, and fits in demuxer interface. Its fragileness is consequence of its requirement to work without reencoding.
     285Jan 11 18:02:05 <wm4>   saste: can I make distros to disable it?
     286Jan 11 18:02:31 <Compn> concat is for copying video , got it
     287Jan 11 18:02:45 <Compn> mencoder would do it, but also would break most of the time when copying video in containers
     288Jan 11 18:02:50 <Compn> because it wasnt precise
     289Jan 11 18:02:50 <Cigaes>        kriegerod: it still lacks a few consistency checks, like matching streams in different order from different files.
     290Jan 11 18:03:07 *       kierank (uid5955 <at> gateway/web/ has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     291Jan 11 18:03:22 *       pross-au has quit (Quit: Z)
     292Jan 11 18:03:24 *       beastd has quit (Quit: So many things, so little time...)
     293Jan 11 18:03:55 <Compn> i have to go soon as well.
     294Jan 11 18:04:35 <llogan>        since trac moved remote backups are basically non-existant because, AFAIK, i do not have permissions to make the database dump and/or the daily local database dumps have not occurred last time i checked.
     295Jan 11 18:05:13 <llogan>        unfortunately, i do not have the resources to perform daily, full backups of the whole machine
     296Jan 11 18:05:25 <michaelni>     llogan, ok, tell me after the meeting what permissions you need
     297Jan 11 18:06:03 <saste> llogan, you could run a backup script from another ffmpeg server
     298Jan 11 18:06:51 <llogan>        saste: which server? i do not think the web host has enough drive space, IIRC
     299Jan 11 18:07:01 <michaelni>     also we need full backups, my problem ironically is not that i lack diskspace or net bandwidth but iam too scetterbrained so i know i will forget doing them
     300Jan 11 18:07:16 <saste> llogan, ok, was only an idea
     301Jan 11 18:07:24 <saste> michaelni, script and conquer
     302Jan 11 18:07:26 <llogan>        saste: it was a good idea
     303Jan 11 18:07:56 <llogan>        michaelni: (ana)cron and rsync might be good enough.
     304Jan 11 18:08:09 <Cigaes>        llogan: what kind of rsync setup?
     305Jan 11 18:09:46 <llogan>        Cigaes: good question. daily/weekly/monthly? depends on the required complexity i guess. currently i'm doing irregular backups with duplicity.
     306Jan 11 18:10:13 <Cigaes>        llogan: I was asking more about the --delete-* kind of options. rsync alone is not suitable for a backup,
     307Jan 11 18:10:32 <Cigaes>        since it will either leave obsolete files there or delete files that may need to be restoring later.
     308Jan 11 18:11:28 <llogan>        that's one reason i am using duplicity, but rsync was just a more simple recommendation (more for the trac database file for example)
     309Jan 11 18:12:02 *       michaelni would be using tar+*zip+(gpg)+ssh
     310Jan 11 18:12:36 <Cigaes>        llogan: rsync can do the work like duplicity, provided the correct options are chosen. rsnapshot, for example, is a good script to do that.
     311Jan 11 18:13:03 <llogan>        i will unvolunteer myself from the backups. i do not have to time, resources, or experience to do an adequate job
     312Jan 11 18:14:09 <michaelni>     llogan, ok, anyone else who wants to volunteer ?
     313Jan 11 18:14:43 <michaelni>     note beastd didnt ever really volunteer, he just did some work on it ...
     314Jan 11 18:14:49 <saste> michaelni, maybe ask on mailing-list or in private mails
     315Jan 11 18:15:39 <saste> should we move to point 2.?
     316Jan 11 18:15:46 <michaelni>     saste, ok, ok
     317Jan 11 18:15:57 <llogan>        is trac also on a VPS or VM or something? if so can images be made too?
     318Jan 11 18:16:23 <Cigaes>        saste: before moving to point 2, I may mention a few more projects.
     319Jan 11 18:16:34 <michaelni>     llogan, trac is on a virtual machine
     320Jan 11 18:16:36 <Cigaes>        Regarding lavfi:
     321Jan 11 18:16:43 <saste> Cigaes, sure (I'm just a bit worried that we run out of time)
     322Jan 11 18:17:12 <Cigaes>        The pull-based nature of EOF annoys me. I am thinking of adding some kind of filter_message() method along with filter_frame(),
     323Jan 11 18:17:29 <Cigaes>        to let the library process EOF and more in a push-based manner.
     324Jan 11 18:17:46 <Cigaes>        One of the benefits would be to have a timestamp for EOF, and therefore a duration for the last frame.
     325Jan 11 18:18:02 <michaelni>     saste, note for the future, if these meetings become too long, maybe they should be split in technical / non technical or something
     326Jan 11 18:18:12 <michaelni>     or maybe more frequent so theres less to discuss
     327Jan 11 18:18:17 <Cigaes>        Regarding network:
     328Jan 11 18:18:26 <j-b>   and you should use a collaborative note
     329Jan 11 18:18:37 <saste> michaelni, probably
     330Jan 11 18:18:52 <saste> this is the second meeting in one year
     331Jan 11 18:18:52 <Cigaes>        The recent discussion on the ML makes me want to implement some kind of global solution
     332Jan 11 18:19:06 <Cigaes>        for protocols that require subprotocols.
     333Jan 11 18:19:12 <saste> j-b, do you suggest a specific platform/software for that?
     334Jan 11 18:19:57 <saste> Cigaes, about EOF in lavfi, yes although maybe mailing-list is a better place where to discuss it
     335Jan 11 18:20:42 <Cigaes>        saste: I do not want to annoy people on the mailing list with ideas that are just maturating.
     336Jan 11 18:20:54 <Cigaes>        I will post something once I have at least a proof of concept.
     337Jan 11 18:21:08 <j-b>   saste: sure, etherpad.
     338Jan 11 18:21:17 <j-b>   saste: it's live, and allows everyone to edit
     339Jan 11 18:21:37 <saste> j-b, noted for the next time
     340Jan 11 18:21:56 <saste> but if someone wants to create a shared document right now, he's welcome
     341Jan 11 18:22:26 <j-b>
     342Jan 11 18:22:26 <saste> Cigaes, ok and thanks
     343Jan 11 18:23:16 <j-b>   saste: something like that
     344Jan 11 18:23:28 <j-b>   saste: it avoids having the load on only one person
     345Jan 11 18:24:21 <saste> j-b, thx
     346Jan 11 18:24:54 <saste> second point: 2. crowdfunding, donation system improvements, merchandising etc.
     347Jan 11 18:25:17 <saste> about crowdfunding, it was discussed in the previous meeting and nothing has been done in the meanwhile
     348Jan 11 18:25:57 <saste> crowdfunding and donations can have different targets
     349Jan 11 18:26:28 <saste> donations are for generic donations to the whole project, while crowdfunding seems more oriented for specific  features development
     350Jan 11 18:26:58 <saste> basically from what i can see we lack developers wanting to create such a project
     351Jan 11 18:27:21 <kriegerod>     which project?
     352Jan 11 18:27:44 <michaelni>     improve / maintain ffserver would be a random example :)
     353Jan 11 18:27:52 <saste> kriegerod, ffmpeg, or a specific feature implementation project
     354Jan 11 18:28:19 <saste> we had a few platform proposals the last time and in several discussions on m-l, irc, rl
     355Jan 11 18:28:23 <kriegerod>     well, crowdfunding is about having idea and having donated money to implement the idea
     356Jan 11 18:28:41 <saste> kickstart, indiego, freedomsponsor and other ones i forgot about
     357Jan 11 18:28:41 <kriegerod>     when these two are there, i think it would be no problem to find implementor(s)
     358Jan 11 18:28:54 <rmklp> I think to attract someone to pay a certain amount in a crowd-funding project a well-defined goal is crucial for the success.
     359Jan 11 18:29:03 <saste> kriegerod, no in practice we never had volunteers for doing that
     360Jan 11 18:29:16 <rmklp> just improving ffserver will not work IMHO
     361Jan 11 18:29:18 <llogan>        saste: there was an additional one i mentioned that gimp is/was using too but i forgot the name and i'm not at my ususal machine
     362Jan 11 18:29:30 <kriegerod>     saste: for doing what and for which amount of money? that's important
     363Jan 11 18:29:33 <saste> what i propose is to make projects involving at least two developers
     364Jan 11 18:29:42 <llogan>        i can make a wiki page for crowdfunding ideas if that could be useful
     365Jan 11 18:29:53 <saste> i'd like to do that for implementing DVD reading support, and/or high-level scripting
     366Jan 11 18:30:02 <michaelni>     rmklp, maybe "fix all ffserver bugs that where on trac at date X"
     367Jan 11 18:30:13 <saste> the principle is that i don't find enough motivation if i have to do it alone, but i could if i have a partner for it
     368Jan 11 18:30:23 <saste> it should also be more fun for the involved developers
     369Jan 11 18:30:48 <llogan>        something along the lines of rht GSoC ideas page might be helpful.
     370Jan 11 18:30:55 <saste> if we manage to find volunteers for this, then we may create a page on the website listing the on-going projects
     371Jan 11 18:30:58 <llogan>        s/rht/the
     372Jan 11 18:31:22 <wm4>   how do you plan to handle DVD reading technically?
     373Jan 11 18:31:35 <wm4>   or maybe that's offtopic right now
     374Jan 11 18:31:54 <saste> wm4, I did some work about it, but it was not still working
     375Jan 11 18:31:54 <rmklp> michaelni: probably. I don't know how many companies use ffserver commercially, though.
     376Jan 11 18:32:27 <saste> it was a dvd reader, i can send you the thread link later in case you're interested
     377Jan 11 18:32:41 <wm4>   somewhat
     378Jan 11 18:32:49 <wm4>   though I doubt it'll be useful for playback use
     379Jan 11 18:33:07 <saste> wm4, main objective and target would be backup transcoding of DVD
     380Jan 11 18:33:37 <rmklp> michaelni: If the goal is to raise money then there are probably projects that would attract more companies (aac encoder, fast j2k encoder to name two which I guess there will be interest for)
     381Jan 11 18:34:06 <llogan>        RFC for crowdfunding ideas on -devel might get the ball rolling
     382Jan 11 18:34:32 <saste> rmklp, the problem is that usually a single company is not willing to sponsor the whole project
     383Jan 11 18:34:41 <llogan>        or maybe j-b can describe their process/experience
     384Jan 11 18:35:08 <rmklp> saste: yes, of course. I thought we are talking about crowd funding.
     385Jan 11 18:35:26 <j-b>   llogan: CrowdFunding is very hard to do for people like us
     386Jan 11 18:35:35 <michaelni>     rmklp, to raise more money making the description more spicy wth hls, rtmp, html5 should attract more interrest compared to "fixing issues"
     387Jan 11 18:35:41 <j-b>   llogan: a kind of bounty system would be more clever, IMHO
     388Jan 11 18:35:47 <rmklp> saste: there was another crowd funding platform that I sent you an email about. one that was specialized on open source. I can'tr find it right now.
     389Jan 11 18:36:10 <rmklp>
     390Jan 11 18:36:14 <saste> j-b, we have a rudimental form of bounty system
     391Jan 11 18:36:18 <llogan>        j-b: your VLC metro (IIRC) project seemed fairly successful to me
     392Jan 11 18:36:25 <saste> we add the tag "bounty" to a ticket
     393Jan 11 18:36:33 <j-b>   llogan: fairly not.
     394Jan 11 18:36:40 <j-b>   llogan: and we targetted normal users
     395Jan 11 18:36:44 <saste> but this is not very practical/effective, if not for small projects/bugfixes
     396Jan 11 18:36:55 <j-b>   saste: this is not a correct way
     397Jan 11 18:37:10 <saste> we need a platform to coordinate several donors
     398Jan 11 18:37:29 <saste> assuming we have some competent developers wanting to propose a project
     399Jan 11 18:37:32 <j-b>   yes, like bountysource
     400Jan 11 18:37:37 <rmklp> yes and at first glance bountysource looks ok
     401Jan 11 18:37:50 <j-b>   it's not proper crowdsourcing
     402Jan 11 18:37:54 <kierank>       many companies won't do bountysource in public
     403Jan 11 18:37:56 <j-b>   but it's more what you'd need
     404Jan 11 18:38:22 <kierank>       mainly because for differing reasons they need to hide they are using ffmpeg
     405Jan 11 18:38:54 <rmklp> kierank: maybe the big ones won't but I believe small ones will and I guess there are hundreds of smaller ones building products on top of ffmpeg
     406Jan 11 18:38:59 <kierank>       and because bounties are an indeirect form of expenditure
     407Jan 11 18:39:04 <saste> kierank, most ffmpeg users are service providers, AFAIK
     408Jan 11 18:39:22 <kierank>       yeah and they need to hide the fact that their service is a script on top of ffmpeg
     409Jan 11 18:39:22 <saste> so the fact that they're using or contributing to ffmpeg shouldn't hurt them
     410Jan 11 18:39:41 <llogan>        i agree with kierank about many of them wanting to hide
     411Jan 11 18:39:57 <kierank>       the others (e.g BBC) need to hide for different reasons
     412Jan 11 18:40:47 <saste> can bountysource donations be anonymous?
     413Jan 11 18:40:47 <rmklp> I know of sponsors who explicitly want to be known as ffmpeg sponsors
     414Jan 11 18:41:15 <saste> rmklp, we discussed about a sponsor page, still never was done
     415Jan 11 18:41:27 <kierank>       rmklp: wait for marketing to find out the new super patented technology that the company claimed to invent is just ffmpeg
     416Jan 11 18:41:30 <saste> i guess for lack of interest/motivation/manpower/you name it
     417Jan 11 18:41:32 <kierank>       and that will get quashed easily
     418Jan 11 18:42:44 <michaelni>     saste, it seems they can be annoymous, i see a "Anonymous" at for example
     419Jan 11 18:43:12 <rmklp> kierank: yes those exist but e.g. at least 2, probably three of the yadif sponsors don't fall into that category. there are a number of companies who build bigger applications on top of ffmpeg and who want to be known as "fair" commercial open source users (whatever that is)
     420Jan 11 18:43:28 <saste> rmklp: the idea was to have a sort of sponsor advertised on the website, in a "Sponsors" page or something
     421Jan 11 18:43:30 <rmklp> and are willing to pay money
     422Jan 11 18:43:43 <kierank>       there is money available for mxf
     423Jan 11 18:43:47 <kierank>       always is...
     424Jan 11 18:43:50 <saste> I'm not of any company willing to do that
     425Jan 11 18:43:54 <saste> ATM
     426Jan 11 18:44:07 <saste> indeed most donations are from private users
     427Jan 11 18:44:13 <rmklp> you mean something along the lines of gold, silver, bronzw sponsor?
     428Jan 11 18:44:24 <saste> rmklp, yes, kind of
     429Jan 11 18:45:21 <rmklp> saste: IMHO the key is to give them an easy package (defined price, conditions) that they can choose. if they have to think how they can sponsor, it will probably not happen.
     430Jan 11 18:45:42 <saste> rmklp, sure
     431Jan 11 18:45:46 <kierank>       certainly I can ask and zencoder and probably others
     432Jan 11 18:46:34 <rmklp> michael mentioned something from, I think, a linux distro where they had conditions for becoming a gold/silver/bronze sponsor and those were based on money and company size and I think that is a good approach.
     433Jan 11 18:47:04 <saste> maybe something like
     434Jan 11 18:47:06 <rmklp> I can talk to the companies I was in touch with for the yadif sponsoring and ask them as soon as there are conditions.
     435Jan 11 18:47:22 <rmklp> and probably some more in the future.
     436Jan 11 18:48:06 <saste> rmklp, yes thanks
     437Jan 11 18:48:07 <michaelni>     rmklp, i meant /
     438Jan 11 18:48:17 *       iive (~iive <at> unaffiliated/iive) has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     439Jan 11 18:49:10 <j-b>   Sorry, to ask, but before asking for money, do you have enough people to "eat" this money?
     440Jan 11 18:49:22 <saste> the other problem is that we don't have a formal entity representing the project, so that could be from problematic to impossible
     441Jan 11 18:49:48 <saste> j-b, right now we got around 2500-3000$ in 1,5 years of donations from SPI
     442Jan 11 18:49:58 <saste> we spent around 500$
     443Jan 11 18:50:16 <saste> so no for the moment we don't have much money need
     444Jan 11 18:50:37 <michaelni>     saste, pay new hw for all devels who need it
     445Jan 11 18:50:38 <saste> what we could spend the money for: paying travel tickets to attend events, paying for hw
     446Jan 11 18:51:06 <saste> also offer some opportunity to developers to pay some expenses when doing ffmpeg development
     447Jan 11 18:51:19 <saste> but this is probably better addressed with bounties
     448Jan 11 18:51:34 <rmklp> saste: yes, the legal entity thing is a big one and probably the most work
     449Jan 11 18:52:00 <llogan>        is fate missing any hardwares we can buy?
     450Jan 11 18:52:36 *       michaelni has stuff laying around he wanted to install fate on but didnt yet have time
     451Jan 11 18:53:40 <saste> about donations, SPI will proably migrate to a different pay-by-credit-card system (current one if Pay&Pledge)
     452Jan 11 18:54:06 <saste> and they're moving to have paypal support for Debian donations, if that work that will be extended to other associate projects as well
     453Jan 11 18:54:06 <michaelni>     or pay someone to update and maintain fateserver for example as a random small thing, that someone should do and that would only be a few hours work so could easily be payed for if we had a few k
     454Jan 11 18:55:34 <kierank>       I don't know if ubitux, BBB, smarter and others who write ASM would be interested in getting my AVX2 server colocated somewhere?
     455Jan 11 18:55:49 <kierank>       I have it lying around doing nothing in storage at the moment
     456Jan 11 18:56:10 <ubitux>        no particular interest myself in it right now
     457Jan 11 18:56:22 <llogan>        feel free to ask on -devel too
     458Jan 11 18:56:27 <rmklp> saste: do you know if anyone has done research on the options regarding the legal entity thing? wasn't ffmtech founded for that purpose and would it fulfill it legally, if there were no other problems with it.
     459Jan 11 18:57:00 <saste> rmklp, the main issue with ffmtech, apart the fork thing, was the no-profit status
     460Jan 11 18:57:23 <saste> which was never recognized and was pending since the organization was created
     461Jan 11 18:57:32 <saste> i don't know what's the current status
     462Jan 11 18:57:33 <llogan>        what is the status on ffmtech? does it still exist?
     463Jan 11 18:57:56 <saste> llogan, you can check it by yourself:
     464Jan 11 18:58:04 <rmklp> judjing by what diego wrote to me just recently, very much so.
     465Jan 11 18:58:05 <smarter>       I'm not concerned about AVX2 yet, there's plenty to do before that :)
     466Jan 11 18:58:37 <kierank>       smarter: useful for benchmarking on modern hardware though
     467Jan 11 18:59:17 <llogan>        saste: are there any FFmpeg devs involved?
     468Jan 11 18:59:35 <saste> llogan, reimar is still part of the board i think
     469Jan 11 18:59:41 <rmklp> I though at least Reimar was on their board
     470Jan 11 19:01:06 <llogan>
     471Jan 11 19:01:32 <llogan>        shall we move on to the next topic?
     472Jan 11 19:01:38 <rmklp> Another hypothetical question: Is there anyone interested in doing this differently, if the non-profit way does not work, i.e. found a company that offers stuff around ffmpeg, like JBoss inc. did for the jboss application server? Disclaimer: I am not interested in being part of this. I am merely listing options.
     473Jan 11 19:02:38 <kierank>       That's not easy because there's a lot of things to deal with
     474Jan 11 19:02:38 <saste> michaelni, about small maintenance tasks, we have some donation money we could spend on that, if we have a proposal
     475Jan 11 19:02:46 <kierank>       rmklp: on site visits, patents, etc
     476Jan 11 19:02:49 <rmklp> but may be completely not what people here want but it is a theoretical option, requiring a lot of work
     477Jan 11 19:03:01 <rmklp> kierank: absolutely
     478Jan 11 19:03:09 <kierank>       the reality is people who choose ffmpeg do it because they have no money anyway
     479Jan 11 19:03:18 <kierank>       or are competent enough to do things themselves
     480Jan 11 19:03:46 <rmklp> kierank: there may be some that match that description but there are others. But I don't have numbers.
     481Jan 11 19:04:43 <rmklp> I would guess that there are a lot of api users out there who would even pay for support but of course I might be wrong. I just know I would (depending on the price).
     482Jan 11 19:05:14 <kierank>       API users are orders of magnitude lower than ffmpeg users
     483Jan 11 19:05:31 <kierank>       since it's easier to write scripts around ffmpeg than to try and understand the api
     484Jan 11 19:05:38 <rmklp> I am not saying this would become a 500M enterprise like jboss but ffmpeg is used by a lot of companies as a library in products
     485Jan 11 19:06:20 <rmklp> you are focusing on transcoding. there are tons of other uses of the library.
     486Jan 11 19:06:39 <rmklp> but of course you are right.
     487Jan 11 19:06:58 <kierank>       the biggest use of ffmpeg by far is transcoding
     488Jan 11 19:07:14 <wm4>   often I think it focuses on transcoding too much...
     489Jan 11 19:07:23 <wm4>   the library, at least
     490Jan 11 19:07:24 <kierank>       direct use of ffmepg I mean
     491Jan 11 19:07:43 <wm4>   yeah, ffmpeg.c isn't much of use for other things
     492Jan 11 19:08:32 <kriegerod>     rmklp, your idea of company doing ffmpeg support is viable. I have seen there are some such companies around GStreamer, e.g., also some theirs devs are at Collabora, which is a company of that sort
     493Jan 11 19:08:53 <rmklp> yes but if you would get just 20 companies that use ffmpeg in players, analysis software etc. to pay 1000$ a year for sponsoring or a little higher priority in support, you would certainly increase the generated money considerably compared to knwo and that is not very optimistic.
     494Jan 11 19:10:10 <rmklp> as I said, I have so far only talked to a handful of fellow companies that develop software that uses ffmpeg as a library and more than half seemed open to something like that.
     495Jan 11 19:10:46 <kierank>       the number of companies that use ffmpeg as a library is quite small imo
     496Jan 11 19:10:53 <rmklp> but it needs a lot of work an dedication and has a lot of potential for bad things
     497Jan 11 19:11:13 <kierank>       most of the mainstream features work well
     498Jan 11 19:11:19 <kierank>       people will pay money for niche stuff
     499Jan 11 19:11:29 <kierank>       (e.g mxf) but the problem with niche stuff is there are few people to do it
     500Jan 11 19:11:29 <michaelni>     i think we should provide the option for companies who want to sponsor ffmpeg to do so
     501Jan 11 19:11:50 <kierank>       michaelni: there have to be pacakages
     502Jan 11 19:11:59 <kierank>       and some clear message as to where money is going
     503Jan 11 19:12:02 <saste> or in alternative to pay for bounties, which would avoid the need for a formal entity/company behind it
     504Jan 11 19:12:11 <michaelni>     kierank, money goes to SPI-ffmpeg
     505Jan 11 19:12:18 <kierank>       michaelni: i mean what for
     506Jan 11 19:12:37 <kierank>       michaelni: people show this to their managers
     507Jan 11 19:12:55 <kierank>       managers don't give a shit about SPI. they care about the money going to things which help the project (hw, fate etc)
     508Jan 11 19:13:00 <saste> michaelni, so it would be DONOR -> SPI -> CONTRIBUTOR
     509Jan 11 19:13:19 <saste> the problem is that we need approval from the SPI treasurer
     510Jan 11 19:13:20 <rmklp> kierank: I think I know companies who would pay just to get on the list of companies that support ffmpeg regardless of where the money goes but it is of course better to write something about that
     511Jan 11 19:13:20 <michaelni>     kierank, yes, we would need a list
     512Jan 11 19:13:46 <michaelni>     saste, can we try to pay some small development via SPI to see if this is possible or not ?
     513Jan 11 19:13:58 <saste> michaelni, i think it is already possible
     514Jan 11 19:14:10 <saste> but it is decided on a case-by-case basis
     515Jan 11 19:14:19 <rmklp> by SPI
     516Jan 11 19:14:20 <rmklp> ?
     517Jan 11 19:14:34 <saste> SPI is a non-profit, and thus must be very careful about how the money is spent
     518Jan 11 19:15:06 <saste> rmklp, yes, basically when we decide about a refund request, it must be approved by the SPI treasurer
     519Jan 11 19:15:15 <saste> so we have no direct control over the donation money
     520Jan 11 19:15:32 <rmklp> if that is only a theoretical hurdle and easy in practice, it would be a good thing. what do you think?
     521Jan 11 19:15:56 <saste> rmklp, i think it can be done for internal developments
     522Jan 11 19:16:30 <saste> but in case it is a company requesting some work, we can't go through SPI (in that case it would be better to use an independent bounty platform)
     523Jan 11 19:16:56 <saste> otherwise you can't guarantee the company that the donated money will be spent for the task
     524Jan 11 19:18:25 <rmklp> legally doing something like a bountysource project is a contract. do you know, how in the case of ffmpeg would be the parties? would have to be the individual developers who pledge to implement the feature, wouldn't it?
     525Jan 11 19:18:38 <rmklp> s/how/who
     526Jan 11 19:19:06 <saste> rmklp, yes, but in that case it is a matter between individual ffmpeg developers and the pledgers/donors
     527Jan 11 19:19:15 <saste> ffmpeg as a formal entity is not involved at all
     528Jan 11 19:19:33 <saste> indeed the developers could also not be ffmpeg developers at all
     529Jan 11 19:20:49 <saste> about merchandising we basically have the same issues, lacking a formal entity
     530Jan 11 19:20:55 <saste> but I might be wrong
     531Jan 11 19:22:14 <rmklp> hypothetical example just for understanding: If I thought having a fast j2k encoder that supports a certain pixel format would be a project that could generate some money, I would try to convince someone like michael to offer that and he would say, he needed 20000 dollars for the implementation and then would open the bountysource project?
     532Jan 11 19:22:28 <saste> rmklp, yes
     533Jan 11 19:22:55 <saste> or the other way around, random developer propose a task, and an individual/company fund it in case of interest
     534Jan 11 19:23:15 <rmklp> yes.
     535Jan 11 19:24:43 <rmklp> so what is going to happen now? Someone is going to "test" paying a developer via SPI to find out if that works? What else? Is someone going to propose a sponsorship program?
     536Jan 11 19:25:06 <saste> rmklp, this is point 3. development task proposals
     537Jan 11 19:25:13 <saste> should we go on?
     538Jan 11 19:25:45 <rmklp> saste: I did not understand that. how is it related to 3.?
     539Jan 11 19:25:59 <saste> also we will probably discuss the topic on the mailing-list, to see if there are volunteers for setting up bounty projects
     540Jan 11 19:26:14 <rmklp> ok
     541Jan 11 19:26:30 <saste> rmklp, > Someone is going to "test" paying a developer via SPI to find out if that works?
     542Jan 11 19:26:56 <saste> right now we have 2K$ of donated money, so maybe it is not enough for a complex project
     543Jan 11 19:27:14 <saste> (and we should probably spend that money for other stuff, like travel refunds)
     544Jan 11 19:27:28 <rmklp> once yadif is committed it will be a bit more
     545Jan 11 19:28:22 <saste> but that works that a developer proposes a funded task, then it is discussed and approved on list and finally the money is sent if approved by SPI
     546Jan 11 19:28:39 <rmklp> ok
     547Jan 11 19:28:56 <saste> to follow that path we first need a contributor proposing the task
     548Jan 11 19:29:54 <saste> should we skip to point 3.?
     549Jan 11 19:31:11 <saste> so it is: 3. development task proposals
     550Jan 11 19:31:17 <kierank>       does that include gsoc?
     551Jan 11 19:31:42 <saste> kierank, also
     552Jan 11 19:31:57 <saste> although I mostly intended that as "funded development task proposals"
     553Jan 11 19:32:15 <saste> about gsoc, I'm not sure we will be accepted for gsoc even this year
     554Jan 11 19:32:40 <saste> indeed i'm not even sure it is a good idea to apply
     555Jan 11 19:32:53 <kierank>       saste: afaik google are ok with ffmpeg/libav now
     556Jan 11 19:33:30 <saste> kierank, good to know
     557Jan 11 19:34:42 <kriegerod>     couple of days ago on maillist there was a request for DVB subtitles support. I said i'll check that, but i'm ok if anybody else takes it, or if we try this issue as a polygon to experiment with above discussed things
     558Jan 11 19:34:56 <saste> we talked about an internal ffmpeg summer of code, but we probably lack the organization/money
     559Jan 11 19:35:29 <saste> we could do it together with videolan if there is some interest and it's not too complicate for them
     560Jan 11 19:35:41 <saste> kriegerod, sure
     561Jan 11 19:35:53 <saste> about that, i also want to propose some candidate funding tasks
     562Jan 11 19:36:09 <saste> namely: DVD reading support, and high-level scripting binding
     563Jan 11 19:36:25 <saste> but: I only do that if I find a partner to work with me
     564Jan 11 19:36:28 <kierank>       dvd reading?
     565Jan 11 19:36:28 <kierank>       wow
     566Jan 11 19:36:40 <kierank>       someone's crazy :)
     567Jan 11 19:37:18 <j-b>   kierank: I don't know where you get this information from, tbh
     568Jan 11 19:37:35 <kierank>       j-b: mentor summit
     569Jan 11 19:37:37 <kierank>       av500 asked
     570Jan 11 19:37:45 <kierank>       VLC is not in a good position however
     571Jan 11 19:37:46 <j-b>   like they said last year
     572Jan 11 19:37:56 <j-b>   kierank: we won't apply, anyway
     573Jan 11 19:38:12 <j-b>   kierank: bored of this PC bullshit
     574Jan 11 19:39:20 <saste> anyway, more proposals?
     575Jan 11 19:40:01 <saste> but discussion and proposals can go on on other channels...
     576Jan 11 19:40:39 <saste> next point?
     577Jan 11 19:41:02 <kierank>       j2k encoder is probably the only large thing missing from the pro perspective, as much as i hate j2k
     578Jan 11 19:41:21 <saste> kierank, would you work on that?
     579Jan 11 19:41:33 <kierank>       no, don't have time
     580Jan 11 19:41:39 <llogan>        saste: i'm personally not excited about GSoC
     581Jan 11 19:41:57 *       rmklp has quit (Quit: rmklp)
     582Jan 11 19:42:06 <saste> kierank, or can you find someone who will?
     583Jan 11 19:42:22 <kierank>       don't think so
     584Jan 11 19:43:17 <saste> if there is not anything else we can go to the next and last point
     585Jan 11 19:43:33 <saste> 4. miscellanea
     586Jan 11 19:43:55 <saste> ubitux, any news about the website restyling?
     587Jan 11 19:44:34 <ubitux>        not much progress, but i'll keep you up-to-date
     588Jan 11 19:44:51 <saste> ubitux, mh, okay
     589Jan 11 19:44:57 <michaelni>     someone should contact apple and ask them about details / bug reports of the prores issues they mentioned on that page
     590Jan 11 19:45:10 <llogan>        what's this on the web site restyling?
     591Jan 11 19:45:55 <ubitux>        llogan:
     592Jan 11 19:46:11 <ubitux>        "WIP"
     593Jan 11 19:46:19 <llogan>        i am unaware of any work to update the site
     594Jan 11 19:46:21 <saste> also it would be nice if we add a goodies section
     595Jan 11 19:46:48 <saste> with designs we collected from past logo contests
     596Jan 11 19:46:58 <saste> i'll probably try to find some time about that
     597Jan 11 19:47:00 <llogan>        who is doing the redesign?
     598Jan 11 19:47:12 <saste> we should also define the license of the content
     599Jan 11 19:47:33 <saste> but if someone wants to do that he's welcome
     600Jan 11 19:47:51 <michaelni>     goodies section maybe best on the wiki so work on it can be shared with more people
     601Jan 11 19:48:14 <saste> michaelni, that works for me as well
     602Jan 11 19:48:29 <saste> although it would have more visibility on the official website
     603Jan 11 19:48:38 <saste> btw what's the license of the wiki content?
     604Jan 11 19:48:43 <saste> what if we add artwork?
     605Jan 11 19:48:43 <michaelni>     the official site could link to the wiki
     606Jan 11 19:49:16 <llogan>        The materials within the Community Contributed Documentation section of the FFmpeg Wiki are released under the ​Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License.
     607Jan 11 19:49:49 <saste> about logo contests, did we specify the required license?
     608Jan 11 19:49:59 <ubitux>        llogan: db0 on #ffmpeg-devel
     609Jan 11 19:50:13 <saste> otherwise we'll need to get in touch directly with the various contributors
     610Jan 11 19:50:34 <saste> also herve flores suggested to adopt a commercial license for artwork/logos
     611Jan 11 19:50:36 <llogan>        ubitux: i don't know who that is
     612Jan 11 19:51:10 <ubitux>        someone i know
     613Jan 11 19:51:18 <ubitux>        not involved in ffmpeg developement so far
     614Jan 11 19:51:22 <ubitux>        except for this
     615Jan 11 19:52:03 <saste> other misc topics?
     616Jan 11 19:52:09 <llogan>        i don't prefer the dark look but i guess we can see how it turns out
     617Jan 11 19:53:55 <michaelni>     what shall we do with,,, and others ?
     618Jan 11 19:54:08 <michaelni>     we are in control of them but they cost money
     619Jan 11 19:54:11 <llogan>        saste: no specific logo license has been selected IIRC for submissions
     620Jan 11 19:54:21 <llogan>        michaelni: dump them.
     621Jan 11 19:55:01 <saste> michaelni, same from me, if we don't have appealing reasons to keep them
     622Jan 11 19:55:30 <saste> is someone planning to attend some FLOSS event this year?
     623Jan 11 19:55:47 <michaelni>     if noone wants to use them (for ffmpeg stuff) and noone wants to sponsor it then ill let them expire
     624Jan 11 19:56:48 <saste> i'll probably try to attend some if we are enough to man an ffmpeg booth
     625Jan 11 19:57:16 <saste> fosdem is probably too close, so the next viable event is probably linuxtag
     626Jan 11 19:57:33 <llogan>        i bet beastd will go to that
     627Jan 11 19:57:38 <llogan>        maybe thilo too
     628Jan 11 19:57:42 *       j-b (~jb <at> videolan/developer/j-b) has left #ffmpeg-meeting
     629Jan 11 19:58:24 <saste> llogan, part of the donation money could be spent for paying (at least part) of the travel tickets
     630Jan 11 19:59:21 <saste> if there is nothing more we can close the meeting
     631Jan 11 20:00:06 *       rmklp (~krueger <at> has joined #ffmpeg-meeting
     632Jan 11 20:00:33 <llogan>        saste: thanks for organizing and herding cats
     633Jan 11 20:00:46 <saste> michaelni, anything else?
     634Jan 11 20:01:18 <michaelni>     not really, noone wants to ask apple about the prores issues ?
     635Jan 11 20:01:27 <Cigaes>        Thanks indeed for the organization.
     636Jan 11 20:01:37 <michaelni>     saste, thx as well from me
     637Jan 11 20:02:12 <saste> michaelni, about the prores thing, a private mail is probably better
     638Jan 11 20:02:48 <michaelni>     you volunteer to send apple a private mail ? or you mean i should ?
     639Jan 11 20:03:19 <saste> michaelni, yes, probably doing it yourself would be faster
     640Jan 11 20:03:39 <saste> as for me, i'm not even sure what the issues are about
     641Jan 11 20:03:46 <michaelni>     ok then
     642Jan 11 20:04:04 <saste> then i suppose we can close the meeting
     643Jan 11 20:04:17 <saste> thanks all for your time
     644Jan 11 20:04:24 <Cigaes>        Good bye.
     645Jan 11 20:04:38 <saste> i'm going to send the meeting log later today
     646Jan 11 20:05:00 <saste> ( the ffmpeg-devel mailing list)
     647Jan 11 20:05:12 <saste> good bye!
     648Jan 11 20:05:49 <michaelni>     good bye all, until the next meeting ...
     649Jan 11 20:05:56 *       Cigaes has quit (Quit: leaving)
     650Jan 11 20:05:57 *       michaelni (~michael <at> has left #ffmpeg-meeting ("Leaving")
     651Jan 11 20:06:35 *       ubitux (~ux <at> has left #ffmpeg-meeting
     652Jan 11 20:06:38 *       llogan (~llogan <at> pdpc/supporter/student/pasteeater) has left #ffmpeg-meeting ("WeeChat 0.3.2")
     653Jan 11 20:08:43 *       wm4 (~wm4 <at> has left #ffmpeg-meeting ("Leaving")
     654**** ENDING LOGGING AT Sat Jan 11 20:14:28 2014