Re: shouldn't youtube-dl be part of debian-multimedia suite and ffmpeg dash protocol issue/s
Reply in-line :-
On 07/07/2018, Rogério Brito <rbrito@gmail.com> wrote:
> Regarding your subject, I think that it is highly insulting to my work.
>
Dear Rogerio,
If you felt insulted, apologies, the idea was NEVER to insult the good
work you do. I know that you give the best.
Maybe I am/was at fault for not giving the proper way or reasoning behind it.
Couple of years ago, I had asked for a debian-multimedia meta package
so that it incorporates all that I love.
If I could just install debian-multimedia-players or something on those lines
which installs all the players, the downloaders and the codecs life would be
much more easier as a user.
The idea of being part of a team would from what I have been lead to believe
is that it frees up the work and burden on a single maintainer/developer and
instead is spread over the whole team. I guess informal talks would be happening
every now and then as well.
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia
> Regarding your problems with youtube-dl, if you want to use the latest
> version to report bugs from upstream, you can simply grab a single
> file (that is a zipped Python file) from upstream's site.
>
I think in the past I had tried to use it like that couple of times
that but that didn't work right.
> Regarding your problems with the youtube video you listed, I can see
> format 22 listed with the version from unstable/testing.
>
Yup, saw that later as well, seems few hours later the 'embargo' was
lifted later
for that particular video. But the issue seems not just to that one
video but have
encountered with various livestreams as well :(
I would have asked for an updated release
https://github.com/rg3/youtube-dl/releases/tag/2018.07.04 maybe in
experimental so I could bother upstream with the issue.
Just to share that I wasn't talking out of my ass, the bug with
hls-native is still in youtube-dl,
see
https://github.com/rg3/youtube-dl/issues/11015
I thought it was fixed as I had tried some small streams later to test
but apparently the issue still remains.
And I believe it was a similar issue for the DASH protocol as well so
it's an upstream issue.
The problem is any issue with youtube-dl as far as functionality is
concerned, they should be handled by upstream if I'm not wrong. And
upstream prefers to look only at issues which have the latest release
:( And as probably the maintainer is aware for sure, it is impossible
as upstream cuts a new release every few days, so it's impossible
just to keep up with it.
I know the maintainer is pretty active and we get a release every
month or two to have the latest sites from which videos can be
extracted as well as some bug-fixes.
I like youtube-dl and ffmpeg combo as it makes it much more easier and
saner option not to figure out which works best with what, especially
when I use the switch -bestvideo+bestaudio quite a lot and ffmpeg does
the honors of merging the various streams into a complete whole media
file (usually an .mkv container)
When I run into issues with youtube-dl if it's something that adequate
brings into notice or a dpkg installation issue then I do report here
i.e. bugs.debian.org/youtube-dl
But anything apart from that should be an upstream issue, no ?
As the upstream maintainer/developer closed the issue as invalid
saying it was a livestream at the time, which seems to indicate that
it's somewhat of a known issue or something.
https://github.com/rg3/youtube-dl/issues/16908
Looking forward to know what would be the right thing to do.
> Regards,
>
> Rogério Brito (youtube-dl maintainer).
>
<snipped>
>
> --
> Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 4096R/BCFCAAAA
> http://cynic.cc/blog/ : github.com/rbrito : profiles.google.com/rbrito
> DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br
>
--
Regards,
Shirish Agarwal शिरीष अग्रवाल
My quotes in this email licensed under CC 3.0
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
http://flossexperiences.wordpress.com
EB80 462B 08E1 A0DE A73A 2C2F 9F3D C7A4 E1C4 D2D8
Reply to: