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
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.
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
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!
Activity
samdbmg commentedon May 1, 2026
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
samdbmg commentedon Jun 26, 2026
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)
samdbmg commentedon Jul 24, 2026
TSC 2026-05-24
JB: Decided that
avgmakes sense as being the target bitrate, andmaxis a measured one: now matched into the PRJB: 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!
samdbmg commentedon Aug 7, 2026
TSC 2026-08-07
Ready to merge