Re: web-m and Fedora 14
The glyph coverage of those fonts is rather incomplete. With the standard Hungarian encodings (either iso8859-2 or utf8) they are near to useless, unfortunately. J. Virágh -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On Saturday 22 May 2010 10:14:01 Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 20.05.2010 18:42, Jesse Keating wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 14:25 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote: > >> I'd expect most of the support to end up in F13 updates, so I'm not > >> sure a feature page really makes sense. > > > > This happens with a lot of our features anyway, [...] > > And that imho is quite bad for everyone involved, as it kind of makes > everyone unhappy afaics. > > To explain: Journalists (even those that are familiar with Fedora) can't > know each and every details of Fedora and thus rely on those feature > pages quite a lot. So after reading > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/KDE44 (¹) they might write (for > example) something like "One of the new interesting things in Fedora 13 > is KDE 4.4" . > > But most people that already use KDE and Fedora 12 will know: that's > nothing new, I already got that version via updates weeks ago. So they > will think "the journalists is not well informed, I don't need to read > this article any further". Some might ever write to the journalist "you > wrote crap, this is nothing new". So he might be angry with the Fedora > project, as the information it provided misguided him. That might > influence his writing for later releases, which is not what we want. > It's a common problem with "journalists" - I remember one "review" which was practically rewritten Fedora Features page. And guess what - one of the great feature wasn't even included in final Fedora (not fully :D). But there's difference - it's feature for F13 - it's going to include KDE 4.4.x as default one and thus it's a new feature. Default F12 image still ships the old one and you have to update. R. > knurd > > (¹) Yes, that page contains "Currently KDE 4.4.2 is packaged in the > devel and Fedora 13 branches and also shipped in updates to Fedora 11 > and 12.". But journalists are busy people and might not have time to > read each and every feature page completely (and might miss is easily > if they do). -- Jaroslav Řezník Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno Office: +420 532 294 275 Mobile: +420 602 797 774 Red Hat, Inc. http://cz.redhat.com/ -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
OggConvert made a release today that adds support for Web-M and fixes Dirac support, so that will allow people with the WebM enabled in GStreamer to convert to it... At least now we have a working free software converter that can be included in Fedora. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On 20.05.2010 18:42, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 14:25 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote: >> I'd expect most of the support to end up in F13 updates, so I'm not >> sure a feature page really makes sense. > This happens with a lot of our features anyway, [...] And that imho is quite bad for everyone involved, as it kind of makes everyone unhappy afaics. To explain: Journalists (even those that are familiar with Fedora) can't know each and every details of Fedora and thus rely on those feature pages quite a lot. So after reading http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/KDE44 (¹) they might write (for example) something like "One of the new interesting things in Fedora 13 is KDE 4.4" . But most people that already use KDE and Fedora 12 will know: that's nothing new, I already got that version via updates weeks ago. So they will think "the journalists is not well informed, I don't need to read this article any further". Some might ever write to the journalist "you wrote crap, this is nothing new". So he might be angry with the Fedora project, as the information it provided misguided him. That might influence his writing for later releases, which is not what we want. CU knurd (¹) Yes, that page contains "Currently KDE 4.4.2 is packaged in the devel and Fedora 13 branches and also shipped in updates to Fedora 11 and 12.". But journalists are busy people and might not have time to read each and every feature page completely (and might miss is easily if they do). -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On Fri, 2010-05-21 at 20:21 +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: > > Are there any plans to have Red Hat Legal look at the patent-freeness of > > WebM before we leap to include it? We don't take other people's word for > > it in most cases of potential patent problems, so I don't think it > > follows that we would just take Google's word for it in this case... > > According to a comment on the actual bug [1] RH Legal has already reviewed it. Thanks, I missed that one. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 8:14 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2010-05-21 at 13:47 -0400, Andy Gospodarek wrote: >> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 11:21:01AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> > Peter Robinson wrote: >> > > I don't see when the support lands in F-13 there couldn't be press >> > > statements about it, just because it appears after the release doesn't >> > > mean its not significant and isn't worth making a statement about. >> > >> > In fact this is a big failure of our feature process, but whenever I have >> > brung this up in FESCo, the reaction of the other folks there was to >> > threaten banning that kind of updates entirely. :-/ >> > >> > Yeah, wonderful idea, let's allow everyone else to advertise WebM >> > support months before us just because the upstream release date >> > happened to be at the worst possible point of our release cycle. :-/ >> > >> > Adding features in updates is needed. Our feature process needs to >> > accomodate this. The current process is broken. > >> I'm not sure we need to push it all the way into F13, but a special WebM >> repo would be nice so this can be easily tested by any user on F13 >> systems in preparation for full 'support' in F14. > > Are there any plans to have Red Hat Legal look at the patent-freeness of > WebM before we leap to include it? We don't take other people's word for > it in most cases of potential patent problems, so I don't think it > follows that we would just take Google's word for it in this case... According to a comment on the actual bug [1] RH Legal has already reviewed it. Peter [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593879 -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
Adam Williamson (awill...@redhat.com) said: > > I'm not sure we need to push it all the way into F13, but a special WebM > > repo would be nice so this can be easily tested by any user on F13 > > systems in preparation for full 'support' in F14. > > Are there any plans to have Red Hat Legal look at the patent-freeness of > WebM before we leap to include it? We don't take other people's word for > it in most cases of potential patent problems, so I don't think it > follows that we would just take Google's word for it in this case... https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593879#c7 ... (In reply to comment #4) > Does this need to go through legal? It has been through legal, and there are no blockers at this time. ... Bill -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On Fri, 2010-05-21 at 13:47 -0400, Andy Gospodarek wrote: > On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 11:21:01AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > Peter Robinson wrote: > > > I don't see when the support lands in F-13 there couldn't be press > > > statements about it, just because it appears after the release doesn't > > > mean its not significant and isn't worth making a statement about. > > > > In fact this is a big failure of our feature process, but whenever I have > > brung this up in FESCo, the reaction of the other folks there was to > > threaten banning that kind of updates entirely. :-/ > > > > Yeah, wonderful idea, let's allow everyone else to advertise WebM > > support months before us just because the upstream release date > > happened to be at the worst possible point of our release cycle. :-/ > > > > Adding features in updates is needed. Our feature process needs to > > accomodate this. The current process is broken. > I'm not sure we need to push it all the way into F13, but a special WebM > repo would be nice so this can be easily tested by any user on F13 > systems in preparation for full 'support' in F14. Are there any plans to have Red Hat Legal look at the patent-freeness of WebM before we leap to include it? We don't take other people's word for it in most cases of potential patent problems, so I don't think it follows that we would just take Google's word for it in this case... -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 11:21:01AM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Peter Robinson wrote: > > I don't see when the support lands in F-13 there couldn't be press > > statements about it, just because it appears after the release doesn't > > mean its not significant and isn't worth making a statement about. > > In fact this is a big failure of our feature process, but whenever I have > brung this up in FESCo, the reaction of the other folks there was to > threaten banning that kind of updates entirely. :-/ > > Yeah, wonderful idea, let's allow everyone else to advertise WebM > support months before us just because the upstream release date > happened to be at the worst possible point of our release cycle. :-/ > > Adding features in updates is needed. Our feature process needs to > accomodate this. The current process is broken. > > Kevin Kofler > I'm not sure we need to push it all the way into F13, but a special WebM repo would be nice so this can be easily tested by any user on F13 systems in preparation for full 'support' in F14. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On 05/21/2010 05:21 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Peter Robinson wrote: >> I don't see when the support lands in F-13 there couldn't be press >> statements about it, just because it appears after the release doesn't >> mean its not significant and isn't worth making a statement about. > > In fact this is a big failure of our feature process, but whenever I have > brung this up in FESCo, the reaction of the other folks there was to > threaten banning that kind of updates entirely. :-/ > > Yeah, wonderful idea, let's allow everyone else to advertise WebM > support months before us just because the upstream release date > happened to be at the worst possible point of our release cycle. :-/ > > Adding features in updates is needed. Our feature process needs to > accomodate this. The current process is broken. You seem to have a chronic inability to distinguish between our efforts to define a normal process and the ability to have special cases (on a sort of "ever" basis). We haven't really discussed the idea that we can ever release something important if it is becomes available between releases, though the normal process is clearly not to. That being said, it is possible to have exceptions to the normal process. You may notice that we've done this several times during your tenure on FESCo. The fact that we may sometimes have to make exceptions doesn't mean that having a normal process is bad. You could really try a little harder to get along with people instead of inserting vitriol at every possible chance. I don't think you'd actually have to compromise any important moral/ethical/engineering/etc position to be less hostile. -- Peter I hope you know that this will go down on your permanent record. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 07:40:00AM -0700, John Poelstra wrote: >Instead of continuing to beat the same same horse you've killed a 100 >times over on this list, have you considered looking for another distro >or community project that is more aligned with your wishes and goals? I second this. josh -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
Kevin Kofler said the following on 05/21/2010 02:21 AM Pacific Time: > Peter Robinson wrote: >> I don't see when the support lands in F-13 there couldn't be press >> statements about it, just because it appears after the release doesn't >> mean its not significant and isn't worth making a statement about. > > In fact this is a big failure of our feature process, but whenever I have > brung this up in FESCo, the reaction of the other folks there was to > threaten banning that kind of updates entirely. :-/ > > Yeah, wonderful idea, let's allow everyone else to advertise WebM > support months before us just because the upstream release date > happened to be at the worst possible point of our release cycle. :-/ > > Adding features in updates is needed. Our feature process needs to > accomodate this. The current process is broken. > > Kevin Kofler > It's fine to suggest we need to do things differently, though it gets old and "trolly" when the message is repeated more times than is necessary for people to get the message. This mailing list is NOT the place to lament all the times people haven't listened to you or done what you thought was best. Instead of continuing to beat the same same horse you've killed a 100 times over on this list, have you considered looking for another distro or community project that is more aligned with your wishes and goals? John -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
Peter Robinson wrote: > I don't see when the support lands in F-13 there couldn't be press > statements about it, just because it appears after the release doesn't > mean its not significant and isn't worth making a statement about. In fact this is a big failure of our feature process, but whenever I have brung this up in FESCo, the reaction of the other folks there was to threaten banning that kind of updates entirely. :-/ Yeah, wonderful idea, let's allow everyone else to advertise WebM support months before us just because the upstream release date happened to be at the worst possible point of our release cycle. :-/ Adding features in updates is needed. Our feature process needs to accomodate this. The current process is broken. Kevin Kofler -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
2010/5/20 Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ) : > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:25 PM, Adam Miller > wrote: >> >> +1 >> >> -AdamM (from Android ) >> >> On May 20, 2010 1:50 PM, "Jesse Keating" wrote: >> >> On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 11:28 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: >> > On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 23:51 +0530, Rahul... >> >> And with the amount of coordination needed to make sure all the stuff is >> in the right place for making youtube work, that sounds like a feature >> to me. Something our testers could even target for testing. >> >> -- >> Jesse Keating >> Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! >> identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating >> > > > It's too bad that we can't say that Fedora 13 has all these cool things. > Fedora would get some considerable notoriety for being the first to fully > support it. Then again, we cannot fully support it for HTML5 since Firefox > doesn't have it... And Chromium is still not in the repositories. That > leaves only the WebKitGtk+ based browsers that use GStreamer. Nevertheless, > it would be great to have Fedora 13 be the first to be able to create > .webm files. I don't see when the support lands in F-13 there couldn't be press statements about it, just because it appears after the release doesn't mean its not significant and isn't worth making a statement about. Peter -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
Rahul Sundaram writes: On 05/20/2010 08:38 PM, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote: On 05/20/2010 03:19 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: Expect a patent fight before the end of this. Excerpt from http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/?p=377 Addendum C: Summary for the lazy ... [a lot left out] With regard to patents, VP8 copies way too much from H.264 for anyone sane to be comfortable with it, no matter whose word is behind the claim of being patent-free. ... [a lot left out] Read the whole analysis...seems pretty interesting. Understanding and reading patents requires expertise in that area. Don't trust engineers to do a good job with that. Additionally: Google has a huge pile of cash handy. It's a very good bet that they will intercede in any patent-based attack on anyone using VP8. Any legal action by a patent troll against anyone using VP8 will be -- and rightfully so -- a threat to Google as well. They did not buy out and paid a nice sum of cash for VP8 just to sit on a sidelines and do nothing while someone gets a precedent that VP8 is patent-encumbered. pgpWjAtZei4o7.pgp Description: PGP signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
2010/5/20 Conan Kudo (ニール・ゴンパ) : > It's too bad that we can't say that Fedora 13 has all these cool things. > Fedora would get some considerable notoriety for being the first to fully > support it. Then again, we cannot fully support it for HTML5 since Firefox > doesn't have it... And Chromium is still not in the repositories. That > leaves only the WebKitGtk+ based browsers that use GStreamer. Nevertheless, > it would be great to have Fedora 13 be the first to be able to create > .webm files. It's still really _raw_ at this point. There is a reason that all the example stuff for this is in development and preview builds. The library can only be built as a static lib righ now. There are what appear to be security relevant bugs getting fixed. It also needs some significant performance improvements before its useful at high resolutions (1080p decode of the "parkjoy" clip on my 2.8ghz x86_64 quad core is not realtime using all four cores :( ). The vp8 team at goggle had externally imposed deadline, and we know what those do to software quality. Just drop it in the repos post release once it's stable and fast enough to do something useful. Until then there is a lot of integration work needed, but shipping unfinished work won't make it happen faster... it'll just make life harder in the future when people are stuck working around the bugs in early versions that were widely deployed before they were ready. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:25 PM, Adam Miller wrote: > +1 > > -AdamM (from Android ) > > On May 20, 2010 1:50 PM, "Jesse Keating" wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 11:28 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 23:51 +0530, Rahul... > > And with the amount of coordination needed to make sure all the stuff is > in the right place for making youtube work, that sounds like a feature > to me. Something our testers could even target for testing. > > > -- > Jesse Keating > Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! > identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating > > > It's too bad that we can't say that Fedora 13 has all these cool things. Fedora would get some considerable notoriety for being the first to fully support it. Then again, we cannot fully support it for HTML5 since Firefox doesn't have it... And Chromium is still not in the repositories. That leaves only the WebKitGtk+ based browsers that use GStreamer. Nevertheless, it would be great to have Fedora 13 be the first to be able to create .webm files. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
+1 -AdamM (from Android ) On May 20, 2010 1:50 PM, "Jesse Keating" wrote: On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 11:28 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 23:51 +0530, Rahul... And with the amount of coordination needed to make sure all the stuff is in the right place for making youtube work, that sounds like a feature to me. Something our testers could even target for testing. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 11:28 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 23:51 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > On 05/20/2010 11:44 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > I believe this kind of situation is why marketing has the 'talking > > > points' concept. > > > ... which is derived from the feature list. > > Yup. Derived from. The point is that it's *not* the same, so it can > cover things that don't meet the criteria to be 'features' but which > marketing would nevertheless like to talk about. AIUI, anyway, I might > be off. And with the amount of coordination needed to make sure all the stuff is in the right place for making youtube work, that sounds like a feature to me. Something our testers could even target for testing. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 23:51 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 05/20/2010 11:44 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > I believe this kind of situation is why marketing has the 'talking > > points' concept. > ... which is derived from the feature list. Yup. Derived from. The point is that it's *not* the same, so it can cover things that don't meet the criteria to be 'features' but which marketing would nevertheless like to talk about. AIUI, anyway, I might be off. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On 05/20/2010 11:44 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > I believe this kind of situation is why marketing has the 'talking > points' concept. > ... which is derived from the feature list. Rahul -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 10:03 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Bastien Nocera (bnoc...@redhat.com) said: > > > Any grand plans? Should we put up a feature page? > > > > I'd expect most of the support to end up in F13 updates, so I'm not sure > > a feature page really makes sense. > > Well, it's probably useful to list it simply from a PR/marketing > standpoint. I believe this kind of situation is why marketing has the 'talking points' concept. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 14:25 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote: > I'd expect most of the support to end up in F13 updates, so I'm not > sure > a feature page really makes sense. This happens with a lot of our features anyway, but it does make a nice talking point and media splash to announce Fedora 14 is the first Fedora release to have working youtube out of the box, and all the other fun stuff webm gives us. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On Thu, 20 May 2010, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 05/20/2010 08:38 PM, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote: >> On 05/20/2010 03:19 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: >> >>> Expect a patent fight before the end of this. >>> >> Excerpt from http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/?p=377 >> >> Addendum C: Summary for the lazy >> ... [a lot left out] >> With regard to patents, VP8 copies way too much from H.264 for anyone >> sane to be comfortable with it, no matter whose word is behind the claim >> of being patent-free. >> ... [a lot left out] >> >> Read the whole analysis...seems pretty interesting. >> > > Understanding and reading patents requires expertise in that area. > Don't trust engineers to do a good job with that. And don't go looking for patents that might read on the code you want to work on. If you never know about it your liability is less, aiui. ianal. -sv -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On 05/20/2010 08:38 PM, Stanislav Ochotnicky wrote: > On 05/20/2010 03:19 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > >> Expect a patent fight before the end of this. >> > Excerpt from http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/?p=377 > > Addendum C: Summary for the lazy > ... [a lot left out] > With regard to patents, VP8 copies way too much from H.264 for anyone > sane to be comfortable with it, no matter whose word is behind the claim > of being patent-free. > ... [a lot left out] > > Read the whole analysis...seems pretty interesting. > Understanding and reading patents requires expertise in that area. Don't trust engineers to do a good job with that. Rahul -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On 05/20/2010 03:19 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > Expect a patent fight before the end of this. Excerpt from http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/?p=377 Addendum C: Summary for the lazy ... [a lot left out] With regard to patents, VP8 copies way too much from H.264 for anyone sane to be comfortable with it, no matter whose word is behind the claim of being patent-free. ... [a lot left out] Read the whole analysis...seems pretty interesting. -- Stanislav Ochotnicky Associate Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno PGP: 71A1677C Red Hat Inc. http://cz.redhat.com signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 10:03 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Bastien Nocera (bnoc...@redhat.com) said: > > > Any grand plans? Should we put up a feature page? > > > > I'd expect most of the support to end up in F13 updates, so I'm not sure > > a feature page really makes sense. > > Well, it's probably useful to list it simply from a PR/marketing > standpoint. > > Does totem-youtube need modified to automatically pick the right video format > once the WebM video codecs land in gstreamer? Yes, it needs some changes, and some code to handle fallbacks as well... > Should we change the default > in istanbul and similar services? That depends on the encoder being available in GStreamer first. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
Bastien Nocera (bnoc...@redhat.com) said: > > Any grand plans? Should we put up a feature page? > > I'd expect most of the support to end up in F13 updates, so I'm not sure > a feature page really makes sense. Well, it's probably useful to list it simply from a PR/marketing standpoint. Does totem-youtube need modified to automatically pick the right video format once the WebM video codecs land in gstreamer? Should we change the default in istanbul and similar services? Bill -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 14:25 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote: > > * Gstreamer plugins - Is it separate? Is anyone looking into that? > > They're currently separate branches of the usual -base, -good, and -bad > GStreamer plugins. They will be merged in the near future, and will > probably land in F13 as soon as the merges are done, and releases > happen. Those are some of the plugin reviews: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=619103 https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=619102 Just missing the encoders/decoders. Cheers -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On Thu, 2010-05-20 at 18:39 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Hi, > > http://openvideoalliance.org/2010/05/google-frees-vp8-codec-for-html5-the-webm-project/ > > "All videos that are 720p or larger, uploaded to YouTube after May 19th, > will be be encoded in WebM." > > So you all already heard the news, Google has released web-m as a > royalty free format under a BSD license style license. They have also > have started using it in YouTube. So if we get things aligned, Fedora > 14 would be able to play YouTube out of the box which is a pretty major > thing not to mention a boost for the open web. Already going through review, though I wonder if it needs to go through legal as well: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593879 > * Gstreamer plugins - Is it separate? Is anyone looking into that? They're currently separate branches of the usual -base, -good, and -bad GStreamer plugins. They will be merged in the near future, and will probably land in F13 as soon as the merges are done, and releases happen. > * Firefox nightly has support for it. I don't know if Mozilla plans a > release in time or we should look into backporting it and getting > trademark approval This is dependent on libvpx as well. > * Chromium devel has support for it too. Spot has a repo running that > is widely used and should be updated Same here. > Any grand plans? Should we put up a feature page? I'd expect most of the support to end up in F13 updates, so I'm not sure a feature page really makes sense. Cheers -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Hi, > > http://openvideoalliance.org/2010/05/google-frees-vp8-codec-for-html5-the-webm-project/ > > "All videos that are 720p or larger, uploaded to YouTube after May 19th, > will be be encoded in WebM." > > So you all already heard the news, Google has released web-m as a > royalty free format under a BSD license style license. They have also > have started using it in YouTube. So if we get things aligned, Fedora > 14 would be able to play YouTube out of the box which is a pretty major > thing not to mention a boost for the open web. > > * Gstreamer plugins - Is it separate? Is anyone looking into that? http://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2010/05/19/webm-and-gstreamer/ > * Firefox nightly has support for it. I don't know if Mozilla plans a > release in time or we should look into backporting it and getting > trademark approval Firefox 4, should be out in due time, assuming no delays. > * Chromium devel has support for it too. Spot has a repo running that > is widely used and should be updated > > Any grand plans? Should we put up a feature page? Spot was been working on packing libvpxp. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: web-m and Fedora 14
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 18:39:41 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > So you all already heard the news, Google has released web-m as a > royalty free format under a BSD license style license. They have also > have started using it in YouTube. So if we get things aligned, Fedora > 14 would be able to play YouTube out of the box which is a pretty major > thing not to mention a boost for the open web. This is a huge deal for the web and for individual people (did you know there are restrictions on what you do with output from digital cameras that use h264?), so be sure to thank Google for doing this. Expect a patent fight before the end of this. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
web-m and Fedora 14
Hi, http://openvideoalliance.org/2010/05/google-frees-vp8-codec-for-html5-the-webm-project/ "All videos that are 720p or larger, uploaded to YouTube after May 19th, will be be encoded in WebM." So you all already heard the news, Google has released web-m as a royalty free format under a BSD license style license. They have also have started using it in YouTube. So if we get things aligned, Fedora 14 would be able to play YouTube out of the box which is a pretty major thing not to mention a boost for the open web. * Gstreamer plugins - Is it separate? Is anyone looking into that? * Firefox nightly has support for it. I don't know if Mozilla plans a release in time or we should look into backporting it and getting trademark approval * Chromium devel has support for it too. Spot has a repo running that is widely used and should be updated Any grand plans? Should we put up a feature page? Rahul -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
