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

Move Flash tech out of core #3520

Closed
dmlap opened this Issue Aug 10, 2016 · 12 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
8 participants
@dmlap
Member

dmlap commented Aug 10, 2016

Flash is going away. Should we make it an optional add-in like the YouTube or Vimeo techs? Discuss.

Some more context in the video.js blog.

@BrandonOCasey

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@BrandonOCasey

BrandonOCasey Aug 10, 2016

Contributor

Would it be possible to make it like vtt.js is right now? Where we request the flash portion of the player if we need it?

Contributor

BrandonOCasey commented Aug 10, 2016

Would it be possible to make it like vtt.js is right now? Where we request the flash portion of the player if we need it?

@gkatsev

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@gkatsev

gkatsev Aug 10, 2016

Member

@BrandonOCasey the idea is that we rip all the flash parts out of videojs and put it into a separate tech plugin like videojs-youtube. A user of videojs could include the Flash tech plugin and even potentially include it asynchronously.

Member

gkatsev commented Aug 10, 2016

@BrandonOCasey the idea is that we rip all the flash parts out of videojs and put it into a separate tech plugin like videojs-youtube. A user of videojs could include the Flash tech plugin and even potentially include it asynchronously.

@mister-ben

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mister-ben

mister-ben Aug 10, 2016

Contributor

It might make any transition less painful if the Flash tech plugin were CDN hosted so the documentation could be as simple as "add this script tag for Flash support". Or host some bundles like core + flash, core + contrib-hls.

I do wonder how many who use RTMP for live streams could use HLS but just don't know about videojs-contrib-hls.

Contributor

mister-ben commented Aug 10, 2016

It might make any transition less painful if the Flash tech plugin were CDN hosted so the documentation could be as simple as "add this script tag for Flash support". Or host some bundles like core + flash, core + contrib-hls.

I do wonder how many who use RTMP for live streams could use HLS but just don't know about videojs-contrib-hls.

@gkatsev

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@gkatsev

gkatsev Aug 10, 2016

Member

It might make any transition less painful if the Flash tech plugin were CDN hosted

We could potentially publish it to the videojs CDN.

I do wonder how many use RTMP for live streams could use HLS but just don't know about videojs-contrib-hls.

Probably a lot.

Member

gkatsev commented Aug 10, 2016

It might make any transition less painful if the Flash tech plugin were CDN hosted

We could potentially publish it to the videojs CDN.

I do wonder how many use RTMP for live streams could use HLS but just don't know about videojs-contrib-hls.

Probably a lot.

@misteroneill

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@misteroneill

misteroneill Aug 10, 2016

Member

I think it's a great idea provided it's part of a video.js 6.0 release.

Member

misteroneill commented Aug 10, 2016

I think it's a great idea provided it's part of a video.js 6.0 release.

@cycleos

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@cycleos

cycleos Aug 10, 2016

I support the idea, while this in fact should be announced at least 6 months before actually taking effect. So users can find the time to plan their actions.

cycleos commented Aug 10, 2016

I support the idea, while this in fact should be announced at least 6 months before actually taking effect. So users can find the time to plan their actions.

@dmlap

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@dmlap

dmlap Aug 10, 2016

Member

@cycleos yeah, it would be nice to give more notice. I feel like Chrome and the other browsers are forcing the timeline with all the limitations they're planning for Flash between now and December.

On the good news front: right now we're only talking about extracting it from the core. You could still include it manually and get backwards-compatible behavior.

Member

dmlap commented Aug 10, 2016

@cycleos yeah, it would be nice to give more notice. I feel like Chrome and the other browsers are forcing the timeline with all the limitations they're planning for Flash between now and December.

On the good news front: right now we're only talking about extracting it from the core. You could still include it manually and get backwards-compatible behavior.

@misteroneill

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@misteroneill

misteroneill Aug 12, 2016

Member

Also, it should be noted that this would definitely be a breaking change, which would necessitate a major version bump. Unless you're always including the latest version of video.js no matter what (which you definitely should not be doing), you wouldn't break on the 5.x line.

Member

misteroneill commented Aug 12, 2016

Also, it should be noted that this would definitely be a breaking change, which would necessitate a major version bump. Unless you're always including the latest version of video.js no matter what (which you definitely should not be doing), you wouldn't break on the 5.x line.

@spodlecki

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@spodlecki

spodlecki Sep 26, 2016

While I personally would support Flash on most properties, I'd lean towards removing it out of core. The fallback would be easy enough just included a plugin and call it a day.

This way; the sites who would still require fallback can use it -- and those that don't can lighten the network load a little.

spodlecki commented Sep 26, 2016

While I personally would support Flash on most properties, I'd lean towards removing it out of core. The fallback would be easy enough just included a plugin and call it a day.

This way; the sites who would still require fallback can use it -- and those that don't can lighten the network load a little.

@gkatsev

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@gkatsev

gkatsev Oct 6, 2016

Member

We've decided this is the way to go and will be doing it at some point, hopefully lined up with chrome/firefox released.

Member

gkatsev commented Oct 6, 2016

We've decided this is the way to go and will be doing it at some point, hopefully lined up with chrome/firefox released.

@gkatsev gkatsev closed this Oct 6, 2016

@spodlecki

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@spodlecki

spodlecki Oct 7, 2016

💭 Is there a related issue / task to link to? If not, maybe keep this open / tag it for a milestone? (Not entirely sure how you guys work, but worth a mention)

spodlecki commented Oct 7, 2016

💭 Is there a related issue / task to link to? If not, maybe keep this open / tag it for a milestone? (Not entirely sure how you guys work, but worth a mention)

@Stefanbracke

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Stefanbracke

Stefanbracke Dec 5, 2017

What options do i need to remove Flash? I have this CODE:4 MEDIA_ERR_SRC_NOT_SUPPORTED error and I think it is due to not having (and not requiring) Flash from my users.

Stefanbracke commented Dec 5, 2017

What options do i need to remove Flash? I have this CODE:4 MEDIA_ERR_SRC_NOT_SUPPORTED error and I think it is due to not having (and not requiring) Flash from my users.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment