FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 05-12-2008, 04:59 AM
Casey Dahlin
 
Default JahShaka

I'd been hoping there was good video editing software for linux, and it
looks like this may be it:


http://jahshaka.org/

Before I go through the review process:

- Has anyone tried to package it? Why didn't you?
- Is there any obvious reason anyone knows of now that it could not be
packaged?


--CJD

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-12-2008, 07:26 AM
Nicu Buculei
 
Default JahShaka

Casey Dahlin wrote:
I'd been hoping there was good video editing software for linux, and it
looks like this may be it:


http://jahshaka.org/

Before I go through the review process:

- Has anyone tried to package it? Why didn't you?
- Is there any obvious reason anyone knows of now that it could not be
packaged?


At a first glance at their website is not clear to me: what video/audio
codecs are they using?
Can the application be built with multimedia codecs we are legally
allowed to include into Fedora? (that means OGG Theora/Vorbis but *not*
libavcodec).


--
nicu :: http://nicubunu.ro :: http://nicubunu.blogspot.com
Cool Fedora wallpapers: http://fedora.nicubunu.ro/wallpapers/
Open Clip Art Library: http://www.openclipart.org
my Fedora stuff: http://fedora.nicubunu.ro

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-12-2008, 08:06 AM
Mike Cronenworth
 
Default JahShaka

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re:JahShaka
From: Nicu Buculei <nicu_fedora@nicubunu.ro>
To: Development discussions related to Fedora <fedora-devel-list@redhat.com>
Date: 05/12/2008 02:26 AM

Casey Dahlin wrote:
I'd been hoping there was good video editing software for linux, and
it looks like this may be it:


http://jahshaka.org/

Before I go through the review process:

- Has anyone tried to package it? Why didn't you?
- Is there any obvious reason anyone knows of now that it could not
be packaged?


At a first glance at their website is not clear to me: what
video/audio codecs are they using?
Can the application be built with multimedia codecs we are legally
allowed to include into Fedora? (that means OGG Theora/Vorbis but
*not* libavcodec).



Jahsaka 0.2 (current stable) requires FFMPEG
Jahsaka 0.3 (early development) OpenLibraries. includes MPEG/WMA stuff.

All around looks bad. A video editor would have to use gstreamer to get
into Fedora.


Example:
http://www.pitivi.org/wiki/Main_Page

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-12-2008, 01:10 PM
Casey Dahlin
 
Default JahShaka

Mike Cronenworth wrote:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re:JahShaka
From: Nicu Buculei <nicu_fedora@nicubunu.ro>
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
<fedora-devel-list@redhat.com>

Date: 05/12/2008 02:26 AM

Casey Dahlin wrote:
I'd been hoping there was good video editing software for linux, and
it looks like this may be it:


http://jahshaka.org/

Before I go through the review process:

- Has anyone tried to package it? Why didn't you?
- Is there any obvious reason anyone knows of now that it could not
be packaged?


At a first glance at their website is not clear to me: what
video/audio codecs are they using?
Can the application be built with multimedia codecs we are legally
allowed to include into Fedora? (that means OGG Theora/Vorbis but
*not* libavcodec).



Jahsaka 0.2 (current stable) requires FFMPEG
Jahsaka 0.3 (early development) OpenLibraries. includes MPEG/WMA stuff.

All around looks bad. A video editor would have to use gstreamer to
get into Fedora.


Example:
http://www.pitivi.org/wiki/Main_Page

Why would it have to be GStreamer? Wouldn't anything
un-patent-encumbered do? (Not that this isn't un-patent-encumbered, but
in the general case).


--CJD

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-12-2008, 01:12 PM
Matthias Clasen
 
Default JahShaka

On Mon, 2008-05-12 at 09:10 -0400, Casey Dahlin wrote:

> >
> Why would it have to be GStreamer? Wouldn't anything
> un-patent-encumbered do? (Not that this isn't un-patent-encumbered, but
> in the general case).

It wouldn't have to be gstreamer.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-12-2008, 01:21 PM
Rahul Sundaram
 
Default JahShaka

Casey Dahlin wrote:

Why would it have to be GStreamer? Wouldn't anything
un-patent-encumbered do? (Not that this isn't un-patent-encumbered, but
in the general case).


It doesn't have to be gstreamer. We have both gstreamer and xine (the
free parts) in Fedora but gstreamer does make it easy to add support
back for the other codecs that we don't include.


Rahul

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-12-2008, 01:25 PM
Mike Cronenworth
 
Default JahShaka

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: JahShaka
From: Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@fedoraproject.org>
To: Development discussions related to Fedora <fedora-devel-list@redhat.com>
Cc: mike@cchtml.com
Date: 05/12/2008 08:21 AM


Casey Dahlin wrote:

Why would it have to be GStreamer? Wouldn't anything
un-patent-encumbered do? (Not that this isn't un-patent-encumbered,
but in the general case).


It doesn't have to be gstreamer. We have both gstreamer and xine (the
free parts) in Fedora but gstreamer does make it easy to add support
back for the other codecs that we don't include.


Rahul


That's the point I was trying to make.

Most people who would want to use a video editor for "realistic work"
wouldn't find much value in an Ogg-only output format. They'd expect to
be able to output in MPEG-2, MPEG-4, or h.264 to display on their
televisions and/or share with customers or friends through the Internet.
Sure, you could output into a non-patent encumbered format and then
re-encode the video, but that's a two step process. Not very user
friendly; plus if it is a lossy codec it's a degrading process.


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-12-2008, 04:31 PM
Brendan Conoboy
 
Default JahShaka

Mike Cronenworth wrote:
Most people who would want to use a video editor for "realistic work"
wouldn't find much value in an Ogg-only output format. They'd expect to
be able to output in MPEG-2, MPEG-4, or h.264 to display on their
televisions and/or share with customers or friends through the Internet.
Sure, you could output into a non-patent encumbered format and then
re-encode the video, but that's a two step process. Not very user
friendly; plus if it is a lossy codec it's a degrading process.


If you can output any format that youtube/flickr/etc can consume you
have something that is useful to a lot of people. If they're not
currently accepting ogg, this would be a worthwhile effort to campaign for.


--
Brendan Conoboy / Red Hat, Inc. / blc@redhat.com

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-12-2008, 09:55 PM
Callum Lerwick
 
Default JahShaka

On Mon, 2008-05-12 at 18:51 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Casey Dahlin wrote:
>
> > Why would it have to be GStreamer? Wouldn't anything
> > un-patent-encumbered do? (Not that this isn't un-patent-encumbered, but
> > in the general case).
>
> It doesn't have to be gstreamer. We have both gstreamer and xine (the
> free parts) in Fedora but gstreamer does make it easy to add support
> back for the other codecs that we don't include.

It has to be gstreamer.

1) Xine doesn't handle encoding, only decode.
2) Gstreamer does both encoding and decoding
3) Gstreamer provides a nice standard way to plug in the proprietary
codecs people inevitably want/need without compromising the Fedora
project.
4) Stop reinventing the wheel.
5) Seriously, stop it.
6) Mplayer supports encoding, but:
7) Mplayer sucks.
8) So it has to be gstreamer. QED
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 05-13-2008, 03:36 AM
"Jeff Spaleta"
 
Default JahShaka

> Example:
> http://www.pitivi.org/wiki/Main_Page


Let me chime in for a second. I've been spending some time on looking
at the options for a while now. Pitivi is THE solution that Fedora
needs to support. Its feature-set is minimal at the moment but it is
workable out-of-the-box when it comes to theora and raw dv editting.
I've been working towards hosting a miro channel for Fedora and a set
of short tutorials on how to make use of pitivi. Sadly i just didnt
get it done before F9 release. I haven't been talking about it much
because i wanted to surprise everyone...but my freetime didn't live up
to the deadline.

What this project really needs to do is find a way to drive more
effort into pitivi, in terms of creating really good plugins that w
can use out of the box. The parts of gstreamer that we can ship
includes so very interesting things like video effects that pitivi
could use... cheese uses them. Pitivi just needs developer love and
its this projects best interest to try to find that love.

-jef

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:19 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org