[Spice-devel] [spice-server v2 8/9] reds: add support to ranks for video codecs

[Christophe Fergeau]

On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 04:34:07PM +0100, Victor Toso wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 02:32:09PM +0100, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 08:53:49AM +0100, Victor Toso wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > You rock. I'll use this as reference for future proposals, many thanks!
> >
> > While this is polished, I'd say this patch is not directly related to
> > the 'preferred-video-codec' series? Ie we could at first not have a way
> > for the server admin to say "these various codecs have the same
> > priority", and only use a strictly ordered list of codecs for now?
> >
> > Christophe
> 
> If we introduce the client side preferred video codec without the
> priority patches, the preferred video codec for the client would be
> always picked and the main issue with that is host can't do anything
> besides disabling video codecs it does not want.

Hmm true that depending on how you consider the current codec list
server side (either soft preference, in which case the client preferred
codec will always be picked, or strong preference in which case the
client preferred codec will never be used)

> 
> If we split this in two:
> 1) Introduce priority
> 2) Introduce preferred-video-codec
> 
> I would think it is okay as (2) would not mess with (1). But we are only
> one patch short in doing that here [0] - but it was recommended to send
> them together as the need for changes would make more sense.
> 
> [0] 3 patches, starting at:
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/spice-devel/2016-December/034445.html
> 
> I would oppose in doing (2) before (1).

My main problem with introducing the priority now is that we have
potential uses for it in the future, but I don't think we have users for
it right now. So maybe it will be the right thing to do when these
potential uses materialize, maybe we will want to approach things
differently. Given the discussion about rank VS priority, 0 meaning
disabled or being redundant, ..., I was suggesting keeping it on the
backburner for now so that we can merge the rest of the patches which
seem more straightforward.

Christophe
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/spice-devel/attachments/20161214/548911ad/attachment.sig>