[gst-devel] Re: [gst-cvs] burger gst-plugins-good: gst-plugins-good/ gst-plugins-good/gst/rtp/

[Edgard Lima]

Wim,

I think it cant be done 'cause caps are different.

Whats the problem and why burguer did it:

The problem is 'cause g711(de)pay can have two possible sink caps 
(x-alaw or x-ulaw) and two src caps (encoding-name: PCMA or PCMU),
this way a program like tapioca-voip that tries to automatically look 
for instaled plugins and its capabilities in order to create a SDP 
description is unable to do it. See example bellow:

tapioca found alawenc and g711pay so tapioca knows it can send the rtp 
format generated by g711pay, the problem is: in that case tapioca doesnt 
have ways to know if it is PCMA or PCMU.

I  like the andrunko proposal: add simple mechanism that allows to know 
which src caps it will use for a given sink caps.
It only adds a new field to each source caps like "mimetype" as bellow 
(that filed must ignored when building the SDP description)

Pad Templates:
 SINK template: 'sink'
   Capabilities:
     audio/x-mulaw
       ...
     audio/x-alaw
        ...

 SRC template: 'src'
   Capabilities:
     application/x-rtp
         ...
         encoding-name: PCMU
         mimetype: audio/x-mulaw
     application/x-rtp
         ...
         encoding-name: PCMA
         mimetype: audio/x-alaw

Take a look at this 
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=9701229&forum_id=5947 
for a detailed description of the problem.

What do you think?

[]s
Edgard - alima
edgard.lima at indt.org.br



ext Wim Taymans wrote:

> On Fri, 2006-03-03 at 10:22 +0100, Thomas Vander Stichele wrote:
>  
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>   
>>
>>>> As I understand them, our stability guidelines for -good and -base 
>>>> (not
>>>> sure if they are written down somewhere) would preclude removing
>>>> existing element factories. Was there a rtpg711pay before? Is there 
>>>> one
>>>> now? If an element factory was removed, then we probably have a 
>>>> problem.
>>>>       
>>>
>>> Well, there was an rtpg711pay/depay and now it has been separated into
>>> 4 elements. Therefore the old ones removed.
>>>
>>> I am sorry but I did not know about this guideline. Also I had taken
>>> advice on #gstreamer and no one mentioned it.
>>>     
>>
>> Well, it's just like other projects - if glib started removing functions
>> people would complain.  Also, I'm pretty sure I explained why the
>> renaming and unifying needed to be done before 0.10 - precisely because
>> after 0.10's release, you can't make changes like that.
>>
>> Could you make sure that whatever element factories got removed are put
>> back ?
>>
>>   
>
> If the element was simply renamed but has the same features, you could
> register the same element twice with different names.
>
> Wim
>
>  
>
>> We can't do releases of good until this is done.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Thomas
>>
>>
>> Dave/Dina : future TV today ! - http://www.davedina.org/
>> <-*- thomas (dot) apestaart (dot) org -*->
>> If you're looking for trouble
>> you can find me on the internet
>> motherfucker
>> <-*- thomas (at) apestaart (dot) org -*->
>> URGent, best radio on the net - 24/7 ! - http://urgent.fm/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------
>> This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting 
>> language
>> that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live 
>> webcast
>> and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding 
>> territory!
>> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
>> _______________________________________________
>> gstreamer-devel mailing list
>> gstreamer-devel at lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gstreamer-devel
>>   
>





ext Wim Taymans wrote:

>On Fri, 2006-03-03 at 10:22 +0100, Thomas Vander Stichele wrote:
>  
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>    
>>
>>>>As I understand them, our stability guidelines for -good and -base (not
>>>>sure if they are written down somewhere) would preclude removing
>>>>existing element factories. Was there a rtpg711pay before? Is there one
>>>>now? If an element factory was removed, then we probably have a problem.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Well, there was an rtpg711pay/depay and now it has been separated into
>>>4 elements. Therefore the old ones removed.
>>>
>>>I am sorry but I did not know about this guideline. Also I had taken
>>>advice on #gstreamer and no one mentioned it.
>>>      
>>>
>>Well, it's just like other projects - if glib started removing functions
>>people would complain.  Also, I'm pretty sure I explained why the
>>renaming and unifying needed to be done before 0.10 - precisely because
>>after 0.10's release, you can't make changes like that.
>>
>>Could you make sure that whatever element factories got removed are put
>>back ?
>>
>>    
>>
>If the element was simply renamed but has the same features, you could
>register the same element twice with different names.
>
>Wim
>
>  
>
>>We can't do releases of good until this is done.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Thomas
>>
>>
>>Dave/Dina : future TV today ! - http://www.davedina.org/
>><-*- thomas (dot) apestaart (dot) org -*->
>>If you're looking for trouble
>>you can find me on the internet
>>motherfucker
>><-*- thomas (at) apestaart (dot) org -*->
>>URGent, best radio on the net - 24/7 ! - http://urgent.fm/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------
>>This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
>>that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
>>and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
>>http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
>>_______________________________________________
>>gstreamer-devel mailing list
>>gstreamer-devel at lists.sourceforge.net
>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gstreamer-devel
>>    
>>