How can I edit the above original post? I’m shutting down the domain where the screenshots were hosted. Tried to edit the post to update the link as I did on all other forums, but it won’t let me; also tried to delete the thread, but it won't let me. How can I fix the now-invalid screenshot link included above?
Perfect, thanks again~
Can that update procedure be used even if running in a Docker container (i.e. the application itself is extracted to /var/www/html, stored in a volume, & thus not in the container itself)?
Or no, because the application is inside the container & would be reverted whenever the container is destroyed & recreated?
Sure, I mean if realtime transcoding could indeed be made to work reliably, it would be an even more ideal solution - similar user-facing result with no duplicate storage. I just have doubts about how feasible this would be in practice, as many NASs probably don't have sufficient CPUs (there might also be issues due to virtualization, i.e. running it in Docker). But if it could work...I think it'd be a great solution :)
>>Your case usage is just one out of many.
Of course, I don't imply that my use case is the same as everyone's - "FileRun will never have a feature..." just made it sound like you view this use-case as utterly invalid/useless/etc, where frankly I'd be a bit surprised if it were that uncommon where someone might want to share videos where the source is very high-quality, but viewers may not have sufficient bandwidth. Anyway tho, just my 2c - obviously it's your call :P
>>Our goal is not to replicate how Dropbox works.
Again, understood/agreed. But you must admit the feature set is very similar, so whether or not your goal is to replicate everything, I figured it wouldn't be unreasonable to present its handling as an example to possibly draw inspiration. There's a difference between "make this identical!" and "hey, here's a possible good idea, and you can see an example of how one very similar service handled it (which may also lend some credence to its usefulness)."
In any case, I see that your view is that it's not useful, so I guess for now I'll just force-download all videos to prevent further users from reporting them as broken.
Bummer. I figured this would be a great candidate for a feature, as: 1) It's definitely how Dropbox operates, & Dropbox is precisely what I'm working to replace with Filerun; 2) I've had multiple users specifically express issues with videos due to this.
As far as doing it manually, besides the fact that would make sharing videos significantly more cumbersome/time-intensive, and that some users likely wouldn't know how to do this themselves, it also makes it more difficult on the viewer end too, as the viewer has to choose separately if they want to view the low-res vs high-res version (i.e. if they want to view vs download) - rather than it just appearing as one file, where you can view it (transcoded) or select the download (shown as available on the same page), as it works on Dropbox.
But anyway, I guess it is what it is. If it will "never have this feature," I guess the option is to stick with Dropbox for video-sharing :/
Just out of curiosity, how can I make it so that visiting a shared video link will *never* try to play in the browser - it will only send it to the visitor as a download? Users have reported to me that the way it operates currently, sharing videos effectively never works as the browser just tires to buffer indefinitely.
>>Transcoding takes a long time, so it would be impractical to do it at upload time. But we're looking into having FileRun use a third-party tool, such as FFmpeg to transcode in real-time when previewing.
If transcoding takes a long time...wouldn't it be much more impractical to do it in *real-time*, rather than queueing a task on upload that could take as long as needed to produce the preview, just once? Many NAS/servers don't have CPUs capable of realtime transcoding, whereas any CPU could transcode to another file (i.e. via ffmpeg) given enough time.
>>This would also avoid excessive usage on the storage space for videos that might not get previewed.
Certainly this would be optional, so users who don't need/want it could disable previews - and if the quality(s) were customizeable, space usage could be limited. But certainly there are many scenarios where usage wouldn't be "excessive" - i.e. it could be configured to do just one half-res preview, or for people who only share videos occasionally, etc.
Great news!! Looking forward to it :)
Two for the price of one. Fingers crossed it isn't too tough~
Perfect, thanks! :)
(Would love the same for the ability to share from Windows, too - as these 2 were essentially my core intentions for trying out FileRun: the ability to quickly/easily share files, like with Dropbox...but self-hosted.)
Customer support service by UserEcho