[vlc-devel] [PATCH] provide the display format from the demuxer to the vout to respect cropping

[Rémi Denis-Courmont]

Le lundi 09 mars 2015, 18:26:17 Steve Lhomme a écrit :
> And I explained each time why there is information missing at the vout
> level. I even explained in this thread which you may have missed.

Or not? There are no questions that the format supplied to the video output 
needs to take the container crop parameters into account, and there never was.

*But* you have not explained why the video output would ever need to make 
distinction between the container and the codec crop parameters. And indeed, 
it makes absolutely no sense for the video output to distinguish those: there 
are just two different manners to convey the exact same information.

In hindsight, the XVideo bleeding taught us that it would be nice to 
distinguish between cropping (valid data that the user does not want to show) 
and padding (alignment and buffer for optimization with no valid data). But the 
cost of implementing such distinction is large, and the benefits are seemingly 
limited. In any case, this is _not_ what this patch does.

> " The reason not to do this in the decoder instead of the vout is that
> the vout is hackish and sets up the texture and things like that
> before applying the dimensions. We need to keep the original
> dimensions at that stage.

Oh, I am quite sure that I mentioned (at least on IRC), that initial cropping 
was probably not working in the video output. Nevertheless that bug lies 
inside the video output core and possibly some video output display plugins. 
There are no needs of, and no uses to, changing the video output external 
interface to address this particular problem.

> You proposed no working solution nor anything close to a useful hint.

I spent a lot of my free time discussing this on IRC and on this list. Those 
accusations are utterly unfair.

You have wasted enough of my free time and expanded enough of my motivation. 
This is intolerable, especially considering that you are ostensibly paid to do 
this.

The topic is closed as far as I am concerned. If you post something like this 
again, I will refer your case to the board for mailing list ban.

-- 
Rémi Denis-Courmont
http://www.remlab.net/