You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
There is no guarantee that the repeat request is fully obeyed.
Instead, I'm proposing that if repeat=1 and the source video requested repeat, yet the source filter is somehow unable to process the repetition, the filter should fail explicitly and give the user the option to use repeat=0 to get a VFR clip. It should not silently return a VFR clip with the incorrect fps, which is much worse than failing.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
If repeat=1 and the input video requested repeat, but the source filter
is somehow unable to obey it, fail explicitly instead of silently returning
a VFR clip with a constant (but wrong) fps.
Fixes#2.
Signed-off-by: akarin <i@akarin.info>
If repeat=1 and the input video requested repeat, but the source filter
is somehow unable to obey it, fail explicitly instead of silently returning
a VFR clip with a constant (but wrong) fps.
To revert to the previous behavior, set repeat=2.
Fixes#2.
Signed-off-by: akarin <i@akarin.info>
If repeat=1 and the input video requested repeat, but the source filter
is somehow unable to obey it, fail explicitly instead of silently returning
a VFR clip with a constant (but wrong) fps.
To revert to the previous behavior, set repeat=2.
Fixes#2.
Signed-off-by: akarin <i@akarin.info>
There is no guarantee that the repeat request is fully obeyed.
Instead, I'm proposing that if
repeat=1
and the source video requested repeat, yet the source filter is somehow unable to process the repetition, the filter should fail explicitly and give the user the option to userepeat=0
to get a VFR clip. It should not silently return a VFR clip with the incorrect fps, which is much worse than failing.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: