local recording

[edmundlaugasson]

Is your feature request related to a problem you are facing?
Quite often are virtual recording device busy - either streaming to YouTube or trying to use Dropbox recording.

There could be certainly other cloud storages available (e.g. Google Drive, OneDrive, pCloud, MegaSync) but all of these rely on virtual recording device, which resources seems to be too limited:

• Start recording didn't start #5972
• Jitsi Recording... #5961
• I WANT TO RECORDING MY MEET  #5957
• Recording #5939
• dropbox recording not working #5756
• Impossible record #5474
• etc

... and causing too many negative issues for users. Therefore I propose local recording that will not use Jitsi Meet virtual recording device but works locally via user's browser. Currently YouTube streaming and Dropbox recording are only one options to record all participants audio and video properly and as we see these features are overloaded.

Describe the solution you'd like
Through 3-dot menu there will be choices

• Start recording locally
• Stop recording locally

In addition there is a long awaited PAUSE functionality expected:

• Pause recording locally
• Continue recording locally

UI design options

• choices under 3-dot menu only
• clearly visible buttons at top floating bar
  • right side rounded pause/continue
  • left side start/stop button
  • in the middle is session time ticking
• both options - would suggest that one
  • menu choices under 3-dot menu
  • clearly visible buttons at top floating bar

Local recording settings

• 3-dot menu -> Settings -> Local recording tab
• where can be configured
  • folder location in local device (either computer or smart device)
  • if applicable, audio and video codec choices and its settings according chosen codec.
• configurable option: record text chat separately into .txt file locally or not

I guess as in case of Dropbox recording there are no choices of audio, video codec - it would be fine if in local version also there are no options for that. In Dropbox there will be .mp4 file where video is H.264 and audio is MPEG AAC (mp4a) with 44,1 kHz, 32-bit which are good enough.

Certainly with local recording option there are expected to be saved all participants audio and video, e.g. like Dropbox or YouTube recording does - all the Jitsi Meet window, including chat, etc.

Describe alternatives you've considered
Currently using local screen recording software (e.g. Simple Screen Recorder under Linux) could be alternative but it will not save all participants audio as screen recording software allows to define only one audio input.

[Echolon]

related:
meet.jit.si recording - no audio recorded #5403

@edmundlaugasson may you provide a more decent issue title, thank you!

[edmundlaugasson]

#5403 was about missing audio in Dropbox recording - I've been checked already that issue. My proposal is about local recording and related actions like start/stop, pause/continue, also text saving separately - so a bit different topics.

[samperd]

Having a local recording option would be handy. Here is my user story:

As a jitsi meet host
I want to record my video locally
So that recording quality and performance are not impacted by online or third party services (eg Dropbox / YouTube)

Implementation details:

• being able to record natively in a browser would be ok.
• idealy I would like to trigger a local screen recorder (eg Simple Screen Record or Kazam)

[edmundlaugasson]

I would suggest not to depend on 3rd party software on recording. When invocating local recording in browser-based Jitsi Meet then it should ask where to save, possibly also used file formats. I think the same browser-based recording feature like currently into Dropbox, YouTube but without any distraction with "no recording device available" issues like currently, would be expected.
Currently SSR, Kazam are options but these do not record from multiple inputs, I mean my and all other participant's voices. I can choose either my microphone input or other participant's input is recorded. Also when participating from smart device then SSR, Kazam are not available but recording feature should work in any case in any device, smoothly, flawlessly.
We would like to also see current recorded file size, available storage space on chosen device and predicted time how long can recording continue until chosen storage space is full. Therefore there could be an option to specify even multiple storage devices and e.g. say that when x % free space left on first storage space then automatically switch onto next storage space specified in Settings. Sometimes also local storage devices can be vary and added during recording. Then would be good to be able relocate next recording location in local device.
Therefore also external storage protocols (SSH, SFTP, FTP, WebDAVs, NFS, Samba, etc) would be appreciated - not only local one. Basically in UNIX-like OS world these might be possible to connect at OS level but sometimes not.
Also other cloud storages would be good to support even the initial idea was local recording. Sometimes these cloud storages are offering also network drives that could be used for recording (e.g. pCloud, Keybase).

[saghul]

I'm not sure local recording would be possible.

We'd need to paint the entire site on a hidden canvas so we can turn that into a stream and record that tream. Then mix the audio of all audio streams and merge it with the video stream so we can have a final destination for both. Ussing getdisplayMedia for the current tab would be ideal, but it's not possible to decide on the tab programatically. Then ue the Media Recorder API: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/MediaStream_Recording_API

I'm not sure it's possible to start a download where chunks keep being added ad eternum.

[edmundlaugasson]

I used to say: if the issue is possible describe with words, it can be solved. So - it is close already to full description of the issue. When fully described, developers can solve it.

[tu-nv]

Hi, is there any progress on this? Is there any plan or consideration to do it soon?

[Echolon]

#6014 (comment)

[toby63]

@saghul

I'm not sure local recording would be possible.

But how does the recording for dropbox work then?
It also must write the stream into a file, so why can't that be used for local recording as well?
In my understanding (no expert) it would be just another destination.

[tu-nv]

@toby63 no they are quiet different in how recording will be done, not even related to dropbox thing yet.

[toby63]

@tu-nv

no they are quiet different in how recording will be done, not even related to dropbox thing yet.

Can you elaborate that? I can't imagine that dropbox does any of the work putting the streams together etc., so I don't see why that can't be replicated for local use, or use on a remote file server etc.

[tu-nv]

@toby63 it is explained in @saghul comment (#6014 (comment))
and dropbox is not related here.
If I understand correctly, your intent is to save video to local storage and not dropbox, and you do not care about the internal recording mechanism. However, the current recorder is server-side, so you do not have option to save video locally. This thread is about doing recording locally (in client-side), which has a different mechanism, and it has some difficulties to implement (I believe they can be addressed though).

[toby63]

the current recorder is server-side

I see, now I understand, yes I read over that part:

Therefore I propose local recording that will not use Jitsi Meet virtual recording device but works locally via user's browser.

or missunderstood it.
Still the server recording problem could be solved first (so we can record things to other platforms or local harddrives).
I only see complicated workarounds.