Re: [Totem] Browser plugin gstreamer

On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 11:15 PM, Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net> wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 22:47 +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> <snip>
>> No, Milosz Derezynski was the one who suggested that, possibly
>> assuming that the issue Mark saw with totem was the fact that it
>> needed too many dependencies.
> Depends on GTK+, gvfs and a media framework, when built that way, and
> hopefully soon just that (ie. we'll have dropped the libgnomeui
> dependency).
>> As a reference there is gst-simple-player which is a bare-bones
>> application I started.
>> And there's a couple of GTK+ widgets David Schleef started:
> It would be smaller because it has less features :)

That's the point of being simple.

>> I believe what Mark Trompell was looking for was a simple browser
>> plugin that could use simple stuff as those above.
> <snip>
>> > Which mime-type would your plugin support then?
>> video/x-msvideo
>> video/divx
>> video/avi
>> video/ogg
> For the first and the third, a lot of websites will be thinking they
> have a WMP plugin, which will then not work on those sites. And because
> of the way the more popular web browsers work, you won't be able to only
> use your plugin for the one site.

Doesn't WMP use application/x-oleobject ?

> So you'll need to either invent a new mime-type, for web developers to
> use, or mimic the expected behaviour.

According to the spec setting the URI in the data field is all that
should really be required:

All the other plugins are just complicating things.

> In all cases, I think the point of this discussion is moot. Totem will
> have less dependencies in the future, and it's already installed by
> default on a number of distributions.

I don't know what was the intention of Mark. But if Totem only
requires GTK+ and GStreamer probably is good enough.

Best regards.

Felipe Contreras

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]