Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

update readme to link ietf versions of ffv1 #63

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

dericed
Copy link
Contributor

@dericed dericed commented May 17, 2017

No description provided.

@dericed
Copy link
Contributor Author

dericed commented Jun 7, 2017

ping

@michaelni
Copy link
Member

The new text says "This repository manages the development of specification documents for FFV1, a lossless intra-frame video codec, by the [cellar working group]". This seems incorrect, cellar has not created FFV1. cellar (you and others more precissely) have done huge amounts of cleanup and corrections in the text. I was also hoping that we all would do alot of development and testing of new ideas and features but none of this occured yet. That would make FFV1 more a cellar working group creation.

@dericed
Copy link
Contributor Author

dericed commented Jun 7, 2017

ah, the ordering was a bit awkward, I had meant it to be understood that it was the development of specification documents which was by the cellar working group, not to imply that FFV1 as a video encoding format was by cellar. Will reword and resubmit.

@dericed
Copy link
Contributor Author

dericed commented Jun 7, 2017

The PR is updated. Please re-review.

@retokromer
Copy link
Contributor

I share @michaelni’s sense of frustration. Since one year it’s always the wrong timing for new ideas and developments.

@JeromeMartinez
Copy link
Contributor

I think we all share the idea of having new features;
About the testing, I kindly disagree as we have an independent additional decoder and I added a couple of exceptions in the spec especially because the stream was tested, actually.
Before new ideas, we need a clear spec of what already exists.

We take any help for having the spec accepted by IETF.

@michaelni michaelni closed this in 2113ed6 Jun 7, 2017
@JeromeMartinez JeromeMartinez deleted the link-to-ietf-version branch June 23, 2020 19:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants