[Kdenlive-devel] Solved: AVCHD camcorder support

[Dan Dennedy]

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 4:38 AM, Ivan Schreter <schreter at gmx.net> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Jean-Michel Pouré wrote:
>> I saw a couple of patches in FFmpeg SVN. Were all your changes committed
>> to SVN. Testing latest FFmpeg, I still have seeking issues (garbled
>>
> Unfortunately not. Just a few small things were committed to SVN.
>
>> image). What is the status of your patch in FFmpeg svn?
>>
> Both frame combining for interlaced video (or some other solution) and
> seeking issues are still outstanding. It's extremely hard to argument
> (the developers there are very rude and the critics is by no means
> constructive; I feel extremely unwelcome there) and it takes forever to
> get a patch through.

I hope you realize by now that this is common - both the treatment and
your reaction / perception. It's probably best to think of Michael &Co
as a gatekeeper to the holy land. Unfortunately, sometimes I think
they have that perception of themselves as well. ;-) However, the fact
that he reads your patches and responds is actually a good sign.

> My patches do have some deficiencies and don't address 100% of the
> issues or address them differently than FFmpeg developers wish and thus
> won't get accepted in this way. Partial solutions (even if they don't
> break anything) won't be accepted, unfortunately, only 100% solutions.
> The reason is to prevent code base pollution with hacks, which must be
> removed later when adding the proper solution (which is also a valid
> argument, but OTOH the code in that area is full of such hacks...).

And they realize this and the number of projects using ffmpeg, which
is why there is strictness.

> Since my daughter (first child) was born a week ago, my time for
> open-source development approaches zero. So I'm unsure what will happen.
> I'm quite sure it won't be all fixed until the release of FFmpeg on
> 21.2.2009.

Please do not be concerned about that release. The community has been
trained now to operate without regular FFmpeg releases or multiple
daily releases based on SVN revision - take your pick :-). So, while
some will appreciate the release, it should be mostly pointless in
reality.

I suggest you slow down and take advantage of your life situation.
Just dabble with it a little here and there but try not to give up.

> I can definitely provide a complete patch against latest FFmpeg to
> handle AVCHD, so in worst case, you can give it to MLT developers and
> let them build FFmpeg statically with the patch.

That is me. I can include this for a little while - as long as its not
horribly bit-rotten - but only for those using --avformat-svn, which
to be honest, is not many. If the builder wizard is changed to use
this approach, a lot of people will start getting it.

> OTOH, MLT has also some bugs in libavformat handler, most prominently
> off-by-two frames for MPEG-2 and H.264 (and possibly other codecs) as
> well as wrong usage of av_read_frame(), which can be attributed to
> deficient documentation. If correct solution for AVCHD is built into
> FFmpeg, MLT has to be fixed as well.

I will take a look at this. Have you noticed this only with transport
stream or with program stream and mp4 or mov as well? If you have some
diff in your working copy, not matter how ugly, please send it so I
can start looking at what you changed and why.

-- 
+-DRD-+