Hi Rute, currently we're planning which frameworks we want to use, the architecture of the new player, defining APIs etc. and we hope that the whole infrastructure is ready to be used in about half a year (with some help from other committers maybe earlier). We want to write some example plugins such as a (default) html5 player and video controls as well. We do not plan to develop a flash plugin on our own but would love to see other committers helping us to improve the new player by creating such new plugins once the architecture is ready (maybe as a fallback to the html5 player).
Sincerely, Denis On 26.11.2012, at 5:33 PM, Rute Santos <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Denis, Rudiger, > > The proposal looks good! As a new adopter, it is being painful to > understand the bits and pieces of engage :) Are you planning to still keep a > flash component or only the html5 player? Do you have an idea of when you are > planning to have this available? > Thanks, > > Rute > Harvard DCE > > > On 11/22/2012 3:19 AM, Ruediger Rolf wrote: >> Hi Chris, >> >> the current engage player is there and working. For sure bugs need to be >> fixed there as long as the new player is not in place. And even after that, >> the current player could be used, if you prefer it over the new one (because >> of the flash player i.e.), as long as the enpoints are still available that >> this player used. We should maintain the endpoints for quite a while as >> other players (paella player, Matterhorn 2 go app, and maybe others) are >> using this endpoints too. >> >> We simply want to start to work on the new player and make sure that the >> community knows about this. We here in Osnabrück at least will not introduce >> new features to the current player. >> >> Rüdiger >> >> >> Am 22.11.2012 03:06, schrieb Christopher Brooks: >>> Denis, >>> >>>> It's not just a new interface, it's the whole architecture that we >>>> want to change. And I think there will be some cross-browser issues >>>> as usual but only in some of the views of some plugins. I hope the >>>> frameworks that we want to use handle their functionality issues innew one >>>> different browsers "on their own", e.g. backbone.js-events. >>>> At first we just want to provide the architecture and some basic >>>> plugins (e.g. the videodisplay (html5, flash?)), after that we can >>>> talk about porting existing plugins or create new ones from scratch. >>>> So basically it's a whole new engage player. >>> So I assume you are in agreement that the original Engage player must >>> stay until all of the features people expect are ported over? >>> >>> I'm fine with that, though I hope that the wiki page will evolve to >>> include as many stakeholders as possible. Multiple people >>> co-developing the codebase is a good thing I think. I'm happy to help >>> do some reviews, though I have limited capacity... >>> >>> Chris >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Matterhorn mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn >>> >>> >>> To unsubscribe please email >>> [email protected] >>> _______________________________________________ >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Matterhorn mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn > > > To unsubscribe please email > [email protected] > _______________________________________________ > _______________________________________________ Matterhorn mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn To unsubscribe please email [email protected] _______________________________________________
