Skip to content

Flow Profiles #190

Closed
Closed

Description

@samdbmg

Description
Provide a way to specify the shape/technical characteristics of a type of Flow and assign it an identifier and a name as shorthand.

That could be useful for finding Flows that can be cut together without transcoding in a lightweight edit.

It could also drive UI elements in ingest/transcode/etc tools to setup encoders

Use Case
As a tool that implements lightweight edit, I want to identify and select suitable Flows that can be cut together, because they have matching characteristics.
As a systems integrator, I want to signal to my users what the "house styles" are in this deployment.

Activity

  1. added
    documentationThis issue relates to an improvement to the documentation or examples
    specThis issue will generate a specification change
    on Apr 29, 2026
  2. added theissue type on Apr 29, 2026
  3. linked a pull request that will close this issueFlow profiles #130on Apr 29, 2026
  4. self-assigned this
    on May 1, 2026
  5. samdbmg commented on May 1, 2026

    @samdbmg
    MemberAuthor

    TSC 2026-05-01
    @johnbilt had discussions and decided that we should merge the simple version of this, and come back to the option of allowing "greedy match" later. Will try and wrap this up for merge next week, and we'll come back to the other bit in future

  6. removed
    tsc-discussDiscuss this issue at the next TSC meeting
    on May 1, 2026
  7. moved this from In Progress to In review in TAMS Community Planningon Jun 26, 2026
  8. samdbmg commented on Jun 26, 2026

    @samdbmg
    MemberAuthor

    TSC 2026-06-26
    @johnbilt Has been through and pulled this up to date with the current spec and working through remaining comments

    Found a limitation around replication and reworking that. Very close to the point of being ready for review (bumped to In Review status)

  9. removed
    tsc-discussDiscuss this issue at the next TSC meeting
    on Jun 26, 2026
  10. samdbmg commented on Jul 24, 2026

    @samdbmg
    MemberAuthor

    TSC 2026-05-24
    JB: Decided that avg makes sense as being the target bitrate, and max is a measured one: now matched into the PR
    JB: There's also a render issue on this but I think I can figure it out
    JB: Probably happy overall, just need fine tuning on the words. Would appreciate final review
    JS: Happy personally on this one once final wording tuning is done
    SMG: Propose we merge next time, subject to final comments
    DA: Needed this yesterday!

  11. removed
    tsc-discussDiscuss this issue at the next TSC meeting
    on Jul 24, 2026
  12. samdbmg commented on Aug 7, 2026

    @samdbmg
    MemberAuthor

    TSC 2026-08-07
    Ready to merge

  13. removed
    tsc-discussDiscuss this issue at the next TSC meeting
    on Aug 7, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

documentationThis issue relates to an improvement to the documentation or examplesspecThis issue will generate a specification change

Type

Projects

Milestone

No milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions