Thread: [Mlt-devel] [PATCH] inherite producer properties defined by uset
Brought to you by:
ddennedy,
lilo_booter
From: Maksym V. <ve...@m1...> - 2012-04-23 13:59:23
|
Hi, attached patch allows setting properties for producer that is element of playlist. using syntax: uset u0 producer.audio_index=all allow set this properties to created producer instead of playlist... -- ________________________________________ Maksym Veremeyenko |
From: Maksym V. <ve...@m1...> - 2012-05-16 09:21:18
|
23.04.12 16:05, Maksym Veremeyenko написав(ла): > Hi, > > attached patch allows setting properties for producer that is element of > playlist. > > using syntax: > > uset u0 producer.audio_index=all > > allow set this properties to created producer instead of playlist... ping? -- ________________________________________ Maksym Veremeyenko |
From: Dan D. <da...@de...> - 2012-05-16 16:20:27
|
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Maksym Veremeyenko <ve...@m1...> wrote: > 23.04.12 16:05, Maksym Veremeyenko написав(ла): > >> Hi, >> >> attached patch allows setting properties for producer that is element of >> playlist. >> >> using syntax: >> >> uset u0 producer.audio_index=all >> >> allow set this properties to created producer instead of playlist... > > > ping? I was out of town for a while, and focusing on other things. Before I look at the patch, how does this behave logically? A playlist is a producer. So, if this just affects the playlist as producer, it seems superfluous. Otherwise, which entry of the playlist does this affect? As it stands, it looks ambiguous. -- +-DRD-+ |
From: Maksym V. <ve...@m1...> - 2012-05-16 16:33:43
|
16.05.12 19:20, Dan Dennedy написав(ла): > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Maksym Veremeyenko<ve...@m1...> wrote: >> 23.04.12 16:05, Maksym Veremeyenko написав(ла): >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> attached patch allows setting properties for producer that is element of >>> playlist. >>> >>> using syntax: >>> >>> uset u0 producer.audio_index=all >>> >>> allow set this properties to created producer instead of playlist... >> >> >> ping? > > I was out of town for a while, and focusing on other things. Before I > look at the patch, how does this behave logically? A playlist is a > producer. So, if this just affects the playlist as producer, it seems > superfluous. Otherwise, which entry of the playlist does this affect? > As it stands, it looks ambiguous. > it set properties for each/per playlist item producer. -- ________________________________________ Maksym Veremeyenko |
From: Dan D. <da...@de...> - 2012-05-16 16:45:09
|
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Maksym Veremeyenko <ve...@m1...> wrote: > 16.05.12 19:20, Dan Dennedy написав(ла): > >> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Maksym Veremeyenko<ve...@m1...> >> wrote: >>> >>> 23.04.12 16:05, Maksym Veremeyenko написав(ла): >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> attached patch allows setting properties for producer that is element of >>>> playlist. >>>> >>>> using syntax: >>>> >>>> uset u0 producer.audio_index=all >>>> >>>> allow set this properties to created producer instead of playlist... >>> >>> >>> >>> ping? >> >> >> I was out of town for a while, and focusing on other things. Before I >> look at the patch, how does this behave logically? A playlist is a >> producer. So, if this just affects the playlist as producer, it seems >> superfluous. Otherwise, which entry of the playlist does this affect? >> As it stands, it looks ambiguous. >> > > it set properties for each/per playlist item producer. Thinking beyond your current needs, do you think we should just go with what we have now or should we plan to extend it at some point to support an xpath-like or css-like syntax for addressing any objects in the graph? On a related note, I was thinking I do not really like the playlist being the default target object of uset, and instead making it consumer. How do you feel about adding support for a "playlist." prefix, retaining the "consumer." prefix, change the default target to consumer, and for backwards compatibility make "eof" without prefix target the playlist? -- +-DRD-+ |
From: Dan D. <da...@de...> - 2012-05-21 05:09:14
|
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Dan Dennedy <da...@de...> wrote: > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Maksym Veremeyenko <ve...@m1...> wrote: >> 16.05.12 19:20, Dan Dennedy написав(ла): >> >>> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Maksym Veremeyenko<ve...@m1...> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> 23.04.12 16:05, Maksym Veremeyenko написав(ла): >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> attached patch allows setting properties for producer that is element of >>>>> playlist. >>>>> >>>>> using syntax: >>>>> >>>>> uset u0 producer.audio_index=all >>>>> >>>>> allow set this properties to created producer instead of playlist... >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ping? >>> >>> >>> I was out of town for a while, and focusing on other things. Before I >>> look at the patch, how does this behave logically? A playlist is a >>> producer. So, if this just affects the playlist as producer, it seems >>> superfluous. Otherwise, which entry of the playlist does this affect? >>> As it stands, it looks ambiguous. >>> >> >> it set properties for each/per playlist item producer. We had a misunderstanding. I thought you meant this uset affects every existing item in the playlist. Instead, it affects all subsequently added producers, which I like. I have applied your patch. -- +-DRD-+ |
From: Maksym V. <ve...@m1...> - 2012-05-21 08:56:23
|
21.05.12 08:09, Dan Dennedy написав(ла): > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 9:44 AM, Dan Dennedy<da...@de...> wrote: >> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Maksym Veremeyenko<ve...@m1...> wrote: >>> 16.05.12 19:20, Dan Dennedy написав(ла): >>> >>>> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Maksym Veremeyenko<ve...@m1...> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> 23.04.12 16:05, Maksym Veremeyenko написав(ла): >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> attached patch allows setting properties for producer that is element of >>>>>> playlist. >>>>>> >>>>>> using syntax: >>>>>> >>>>>> uset u0 producer.audio_index=all >>>>>> >>>>>> allow set this properties to created producer instead of playlist... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ping? >>>> >>>> >>>> I was out of town for a while, and focusing on other things. Before I >>>> look at the patch, how does this behave logically? A playlist is a >>>> producer. So, if this just affects the playlist as producer, it seems >>>> superfluous. Otherwise, which entry of the playlist does this affect? >>>> As it stands, it looks ambiguous. >>>> >>> >>> it set properties for each/per playlist item producer. > > We had a misunderstanding. I thought you meant this uset affects every > existing item in the playlist. Instead, it affects all subsequently > added producers, which I like. I have applied your patch. > thanks... -- ________________________________________ Maksym Veremeyenko |