Announce the rotated resolution so portrait streams are not pillarboxed

[x270880x]

A portrait broadcast tells the RTMP server it is landscape.

VideoEncoder stores width/height exactly as prepareVideoEncoder received them and keeps rotation separately — at 90 or 270 it configures the codec as height x width (VideoEncoder.java:136-141). So a stream prepared with (1920, 1080, rotation = 90) really produces 1080x1920 frames, while getVideoResolution() returns 1920x1080.

That pair goes straight into onMetaData:

• GenericStream.kt:111
• RtmpStream.kt:73
• MultiStream.kt:188

Players trust onMetaData. YouTube opens a 16:9 window and pillarboxes the vertical picture — black bars down both sides — which is exactly what our users reported for vertical streams.

MultiCamera1/2 already handle this at the call site:

if (videoEncoder.rotation == 90 || videoEncoder.rotation == 270) {
    rtmpClients[index].setVideoResolution(videoEncoder.height, videoEncoder.width)
} else {
    rtmpClients[index].setVideoResolution(videoEncoder.width, videoEncoder.height)
}

so only the newer classes are affected. I fixed it inside getVideoResolution() instead of repeating the swap three times, so anything else reading it also gets the shape that is actually on the wire.

Measured on a Samsung SM-A065F, camera in portrait: prepared 1920x1080 with rotation 90, captured stream carries 1080x1920 frames (read from the SPS), and the announced resolution now matches instead of claiming landscape.

[pedroSG94]

Hello,

Thank you for the PR, but please, remove the comment in the code.
The code is self explanatory since it is the same than in other classes and you already have the explanation in the commit message.
That type of messages, but in a short way if possible, are fine only with public methods (to let the user how to use them) or in a internal complex code that you will need feedback about the reason in the future. I think it is not the case since it is done in all RTMP classes like RtmpCamera1.

[x270880x]

Done — comment removed, the diff is now the code change only. The reasoning stays in the commit message, as you suggested.

Thanks for looking at it.