Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Change from jwplayer to using video.js, projeckktor or mediaelementjs #66

Open
mithro opened this issue Aug 1, 2014 · 3 comments
Open
Labels

Comments

@mithro
Copy link
Member

mithro commented Aug 1, 2014

While jwplayer is technically "open source" its CC-BY-NC which is not free. Video.js and preojekktor look like decent really open source replacements.

@mithro mithro changed the title Change from jwplayer to using video.js or projeckktor Change from jwplayer to using video.js, projeckktor or mediaelementjs Aug 1, 2014
@mithro
Copy link
Member Author

mithro commented Aug 1, 2014

@xfxf
Copy link
Member

xfxf commented Aug 2, 2014

Hi @mithro, can you please be more explicit in your criteria for a replacement - what problems are we trying to solve of moving to a FOSS replacement? (I'm referring to other similar tickets here, too, as you've also requested an upgrade of jwplayer)

@mithro
Copy link
Member Author

mithro commented Aug 2, 2014

Need to support a wide variety of devices include;

  • Desktop Browsers
  • Firefox
    • Chrome
    • IE
    • Safari
    • Opera maybe?
  • Mobile Browsers
    • iPhone Safari
    • Android browser

This means;

  • Support for webm (firefox/chrome)
  • Support for h264 (safari + flash fallback)
  • Support for flash fallback
  • Support for HLS streaming (iPhone / Android devices)
  • Support for DASH (maybe?)
  • Support for rtmp?
  • Support for YouTube (maybe?)

Should also support the following features;

  • Multiple stream quality selection (preferable automatically)
  • "Live" support (IE not showing seek bar, etc)

On 2 August 2014 14:22, Ryan Verner notifications@github.com wrote:

Hi @mithro https://github.com/mithro, can you please be more explicit
in your criteria for a replacement - what problems are we trying to solve?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#66 (comment)
.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants