On 13-06-21 7:02 AM, Cullen Jennings wrote: > Seriously, why not put it in Firefox and develop this in an agile way, just > let it keep getting better, break the bitstream whenever for now, just put it > in and iterate. We need to realize that a successful video codec is partially > a technical problem and partially a problem of getting the whole ecosystem to > agree to build the codec before there is any use use of it, that includes > chip set vendors, mobile handsets, conference bridges, and yes, even > browsers. So help break the chicken / egg problem of who goes first by > shipping it early and often.
Putting it in firefox would be the opposite of agility for codec developement. Those extra 5 million lines of code don't exactly speed up iteration. We could land snapshots in Firefox, behind a pref that's default-enabled only on Nightly and Aurora, if that would really help adoption mindshare and integration testing before the codec stablizes. Right now the format changes often enough you'd have to make an effort to find the corresponding encoder to create files it could play. Someone could provide a page with references and demo files to ameliorate that. > While we are on the topic, why not add in all the codecs that can easily be > added and don't have IPR problems. Format proliferation leads to maintenance nightmares. There needs to be a really good reason to ship a new format as part of the web platform. Especially if you care about barrier to entry, like Mozilla does. Got a copy of stuffit around in case you want to read http://www.cryptonomicon.com/command.txt.sit ? :) > Now I am going to go back to finding the paddles for the canoe in my back > yard (Calgary is flooding as we speak) I heard! Hope the damage isn't too bad and only novelty visits you. Cheers, -r _______________________________________________ dev-media mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-media
