On 18-03-17 21:11, Alexander Adolf wrote:
> Hello Martin,
>
> On 2017-03-17, at 16:22 , Martin Kaiser <lists@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> [...]
>> good to see you again. We worked together in the DVC-CI+ group back in
>> 2014.
>
> Good seeing you again! I believe to remember it was the meeting in Munich?
>
>> I hope that I told you about Wireshark's CI+ dissector then ;-)
>
> Yu did indeed. ;)
>
>> [...]
>> There's no such thing as a "high-level introduction to the DVB-related
>> functionality" document.
>
> Which I hadn't expected anyway.
>
>> There is, however, doc/README.dissector, which is worth a read.
>
> I'm studying this at the moment. But there's always the moment when you're convinced you had followed all instructions meticulously, but it still won't work. That's when a little hint from a more experienced developer comes handy.
>
>>> (1) A little bit of streamlining of how DVB PSI/SI is presented when
>>> analysing MPEG2-TS. I could e.g. imagine it to help readability if the
>>> PID were shown in the source and/or destination address field. Also,
>>> when interpreting DVB PSI/SI tables, some interpretations of
>>> identifiers doesn't seem to be quite accurate.
>>
>> That sounds like a good starting point: Find a field that we don't
>> interpret correctly. Try to find out where it's defined and modify it.
>> Try to come up with a small and simple modification for the first patch.
>> If you get stuck along the way, let me know which field you're looking
>> at and prepare a ts file that you can share with us.
>> [...]
>
> Sounds like a plan. My first patch should be... posted here?
>
>
Post here? No, submit to Gerrit: https://code.wireshark.org/review
Why? because: https://wiki.wireshark.org/Development/Workflow
With more detail here: https://wiki.wireshark.org/CreatingPatches and here:
https://wiki.wireshark.org/Development/SubmittingPatches
Regards,
Jaap
