visualization of CVS commits

visualization of CVS commits

[Werner LEMBERG]

Folks,


It would be nice if someone created a code_swarm video for Emacs...
You should definitely have a look at the Python one :-)

  http://vis.cs.ucdavis.edu/~ogawa/codeswarm/


    Werner

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Richard M Stallman]

    It would be nice if someone created a code_swarm video for Emacs...
    You should definitely have a look at the Python one :-)

What video format do they use?
We should insist on publishing our videos in Ogg Theora _only_.
(See Playogg.org.)

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Paul R]

Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

>     It would be nice if someone created a code_swarm video for Emacs...
>     You should definitely have a look at the Python one :-)
>
> What video format do they use?
> We should insist on publishing our videos in Ogg Theora _only_.
> (See Playogg.org.)

Although demo vids are encoded into something strange (well, to be
honnest, I don't know, but it is rendered by a macromedia flash plugin
so I assume it is something strange), the code itself seems to only
generate a collection of screenshots at the moment. Then the picts
have to be assembled. mencoder can do the assembly in Ogg.

I also find the demo very cool, and I think releasing Emacs 23
accompanied with such a video would have a very positive effect.


-- 
      Paul

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Richard M Stallman]

    I also find the demo very cool, and I think releasing Emacs 23
    accompanied with such a video would have a very positive effect.

The use of Flash is very bad for free software.  If we release
a video, we should release it _only_ in Ogg Theora.

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[David Kastrup]

Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

>     I also find the demo very cool, and I think releasing Emacs 23
>     accompanied with such a video would have a very positive effect.
>
> The use of Flash is very bad for free software.  If we release
> a video, we should release it _only_ in Ogg Theora.

I am not sure, but isn't the version of Flash supported by the Gnash
player reasonably documented?

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Geoffrey Teale]

On Jun 25, 2008, at 5:38 PM, David Kastrup wrote:

> Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:
>
>>    I also find the demo very cool, and I think releasing Emacs 23
>>    accompanied with such a video would have a very positive effect.
>>
>> The use of Flash is very bad for free software.  If we release
>> a video, we should release it _only_ in Ogg Theora.
>
> I am not sure, but isn't the version of Flash supported by the Gnash
> player reasonably documented?

To draw an analogy: OpenOffice.org exists therefore it is OK to  
distribute emacs documents in MS Word format.

Some people may agree with that statement, I for one do not.

-- 
Geoffrey Teale
Software and Technology Consultant, München
tealeg@member.fsf.org

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[David Kastrup]

Geoffrey Teale <tealeg@member.fsf.org> writes:

> On Jun 25, 2008, at 5:38 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
>
>> Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:
>>
>>>    I also find the demo very cool, and I think releasing Emacs 23
>>>    accompanied with such a video would have a very positive effect.
>>>
>>> The use of Flash is very bad for free software.  If we release
>>> a video, we should release it _only_ in Ogg Theora.
>>
>> I am not sure, but isn't the version of Flash supported by the Gnash
>> player reasonably documented?
>
> To draw an analogy: OpenOffice.org exists therefore it is OK to
> distribute emacs documents in MS Word format.

The analogy falls down exactly at the point of my question, because MS
Word format is not documented at all reasonably.  It also falls down
otherwise since Emacs has a builtin info reader, but no builtin Ogg
Theora reader.

> Some people may agree with that statement, I for one do not.

So you make up a strawman which has absolutely no usable connection with
my question or Richard's statement and then sneer at it.

That's all very nice, but I am still interested about the original
question.

One problem that I see with Ogg Theora that it is intended, as far as I
know, for real-life movies.  Just like JPEGS are rather unsuitable for
screen shots when compared to well-made PNGs (except when a large amount
of screen is covered by a photograph) because of a lousy tradeoff
between artifacts and compression ratio (PNGs tend to be quite smaller
and sharper), I'd expect Ogg Theora to be similarly encumbered for
screen animations.

Feel free to point out when I am mistaken.  But please try addressing
what I have been saying instead of something else.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[James Cloos]

>>>>> "David" == David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

David> One problem that I see with Ogg Theora that it is intended, as
David> far as I know, for real-life movies.  Just like JPEGS are rather
David> unsuitable for screen shots when compared to well-made PNGs....

The Beeb's Dirac might handle cartoon-style animation better than
Theora, also uses the Ogg container format and is Free.  Their
implementation, schroedinger, is also Free Software.

I believe Xiph has chosen to promote Dirac rather than continuing work
on the wavelet codec they were planning on writing (Tarkin?).

Xiph also has a spec for MNG in an Ogg container, which primarily is
useful for combining audio -- such as Vorbis -- with the MNG.  That
would certainly give sharp output for cartoonish bitmaps.

I'm not aware of a good choice yet for moving vector art, though.
Synfig's format might qualify, but don't believe there is a player for
it other than the editor itself.

-JimC
-- 
James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com>         OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Thomas Lord]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1816 bytes --]

I don't know if anyone would volunteer to do the work
or how RMS would feel about the idea but:

Perhaps a sweet goal would be to put together a
vid with a few seconds of some stock footage of
RMS talking about key points,  some title screens
or captions linking to ogg formats and other
FSF-related video, and (if possible) use free software
tools to prepare a video that "youtube" can handle
(which would be a flash/gnash vid).

Most people who view it via youtube will be using
non-free software and the problematic flash format
but it would still be a bit subversive in that the links
would still lead *some* to explore GNU and ogg
and, such a posting would head off much of the impulse
of people who don't care about software freedom per
se to put it on youtube.

-t




James Cloos wrote:
>>>>>> "David" == David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>>>>>>             
>
> David> One problem that I see with Ogg Theora that it is intended, as
> David> far as I know, for real-life movies.  Just like JPEGS are rather
> David> unsuitable for screen shots when compared to well-made PNGs....
>
> The Beeb's Dirac might handle cartoon-style animation better than
> Theora, also uses the Ogg container format and is Free.  Their
> implementation, schroedinger, is also Free Software.
>
> I believe Xiph has chosen to promote Dirac rather than continuing work
> on the wavelet codec they were planning on writing (Tarkin?).
>
> Xiph also has a spec for MNG in an Ogg container, which primarily is
> useful for combining audio -- such as Vorbis -- with the MNG.  That
> would certainly give sharp output for cartoonish bitmaps.
>
> I'm not aware of a good choice yet for moving vector art, though.
> Synfig's format might qualify, but don't believe there is a player for
> it other than the editor itself.
>
> -JimC
>   


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2565 bytes --]

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Richard M Stallman]

    Perhaps a sweet goal would be to put together a
    vid with a few seconds of some stock footage of
    RMS talking about key points,  some title screens
    or captions linking to ogg formats and other
    FSF-related video,

That is something I might do (but it isn't particularly related to Emacs).

		       and (if possible) use free software
    tools to prepare a video that "youtube" can handle
    (which would be a flash/gnash vid).

Using that format would undermine our words, so we won't do that.

    Most people who view it via youtube will be using
    non-free software and the problematic flash format
    but it would still be a bit subversive in that the links
    would still lead *some* to explore GNU and ogg

On the contrary, the use of Flash would subvert our message.
This is a case where the medium conveys a message, and that
message contradicts what we say.

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Geoffrey Teale]

On Jun 25, 2008, at 7:37 PM, David Kastrup wrote:

> Geoffrey Teale <tealeg@member.fsf.org> writes:
>
>> On Jun 25, 2008, at 5:38 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>>> Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:
>>>
>>>>   I also find the demo very cool, and I think releasing Emacs 23
>>>>   accompanied with such a video would have a very positive effect.
>>>>
>>>> The use of Flash is very bad for free software.  If we release
>>>> a video, we should release it _only_ in Ogg Theora.
>>>
>>> I am not sure, but isn't the version of Flash supported by the Gnash
>>> player reasonably documented?
>>
>> To draw an analogy: OpenOffice.org exists therefore it is OK to
>> distribute emacs documents in MS Word format.
>
> The analogy falls down exactly at the point of my question, because MS
> Word format is not documented at all reasonably.  It also falls down
> otherwise since Emacs has a builtin info reader, but no builtin Ogg
> Theora reader.
>

Well, you say a 'version' of flash is documented.   Now I will freely  
admit my argument is a little trite, but what I mean to say is that  
Emacs should not be seen to promote the use of a format that isn't  
entirely free.    My, admittedly poor, analogy was trying to show that  
the question of whether or not a tool is available to view the  
material which is free (how ever it came about, through documentation  
or otherwise) is not a complete solution if the format itself is not  
completely free, in it's most current, complete version.    If you  
send someone the message that flash is OK, how are they to distinguish  
between documented version 8 that *might*, if you're really lucky,  
work in Gnash and version 9 which will not?

>> Some people may agree with that statement, I for one do not.
>
> So you make up a strawman which has absolutely no usable connection  
> with
> my question or Richard's statement and then sneer at it.
>

I am sorry.  I really did not mean to sneer - I simply feel strongly  
about flash and felt compelled to support an argument against that  
format.

> That's all very nice, but I am still interested about the original
> question.

Going back to the beginning - I think making such a video available  
would certainly be quite cool and is the sort of material that could  
easily get pushed around "viraly" on sites like reddit.   I see no  
downside to that idea.

> One problem that I see with Ogg Theora that it is intended, as far  
> as I
> know, for real-life movies.  Just like JPEGS are rather unsuitable for
> screen shots when compared to well-made PNGs (except when a large  
> amount
> of screen is covered by a photograph) because of a lousy tradeoff
> between artifacts and compression ratio (PNGs tend to be quite smaller
> and sharper), I'd expect Ogg Theora to be similarly encumbered for
> screen animations.

I see the point, but I'd contend that the freedom issues are more  
important (to me at least).   There must be some suitable, free  
software, animation tools out there.


> Feel free to point out when I am mistaken.  But please try addressing
> what I have been saying instead of something else.

Sorry, I simply felt strongly about it, that is all.
Regards,
-- 
Geoffrey Teale
Software and Technology Consultant, München
tealeg@member.fsf.org

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:44:07 +0200
> From: Geoffrey Teale <tealeg@member.fsf.org>
> 
> > I am not sure, but isn't the version of Flash supported by the Gnash
> > player reasonably documented?
> 
> To draw an analogy: OpenOffice.org exists therefore it is OK to  
> distribute emacs documents in MS Word format.
> 
> Some people may agree with that statement, I for one do not.

Why not?  I thought a format was only bad if its details were kept
secret.

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[David Kastrup]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:44:07 +0200
>> From: Geoffrey Teale <tealeg@member.fsf.org>
>> 
>> > I am not sure, but isn't the version of Flash supported by the Gnash
>> > player reasonably documented?
>> 
>> To draw an analogy: OpenOffice.org exists therefore it is OK to  
>> distribute emacs documents in MS Word format.
>> 
>> Some people may agree with that statement, I for one do not.
>
> Why not?  I thought a format was only bad if its details were kept
> secret.

I think you and he are placing your focus on different sides of the
"analogy".

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Richard M Stallman]

    Why not?  I thought a format was only bad if its details were kept
    secret.

A format is bad if it pressures people into use of non-free software.
Secrecy is one reason that might happen, but patents are another.
Rapid changes by a company are another.  Those two both apply to Flash.

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
> CC: tealeg@member.fsf.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:21:20 -0400
> 
>     Why not?  I thought a format was only bad if its details were kept
>     secret.
> 
> A format is bad if it pressures people into use of non-free software.
> Secrecy is one reason that might happen, but patents are another.
> Rapid changes by a company are another.  Those two both apply to Flash.

Are there pattern issues with MS Word format?  And if so, how come
OpenOffice handles it without risking litigation?

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[David Kastrup]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
>> CC: tealeg@member.fsf.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:21:20 -0400
>> 
>>     Why not?  I thought a format was only bad if its details were kept
>>     secret.
>> 
>> A format is bad if it pressures people into use of non-free software.
>> Secrecy is one reason that might happen, but patents are another.
>> Rapid changes by a company are another.  Those two both apply to Flash.
>
> Are there pattern issues with MS Word format?

I think partly so.

> And if so, how come OpenOffice handles it without risking litigation?

Sun has a patent exchange pact with Microsoft.  I think this would tend
to cover the upstream OpenOffice and thus keep the topic off the table.
Microsoft tends to apply visible pressure only when they consider
something at stake for them, so they tend to be rather lax about
pursuing reverse engineering of their formats and the usage (keeps the
focus off the possible consequences of their monopoly position).  You
can't rely on it: it has surprised a lot of people when they started
pursuing some FAT patent for preformatted media recently.

But Openoffice derivatives are off the radar in that respect, I guess.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Richard M Stallman]

    Are there pattern issues with MS Word format?  And if so, how come
    OpenOffice handles it without risking litigation?

I don't think Word format is patented.
OOXML is patented.

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Stefan Monnier]

>> I also find the demo very cool, and I think releasing Emacs 23
>> accompanied with such a video would have a very positive effect.
>> 
>> The use of Flash is very bad for free software.  If we release
>> a video, we should release it _only_ in Ogg Theora.

> I am not sure, but isn't the version of Flash supported by the Gnash
> player reasonably documented?

No offense to the Gnash people, but I haven't yet managed to watch any
Flash page on my machines, except the one where I gave in to my wife's
threats to use her Windows machine and installed Adobe's
Flash implementation.

Not that I mind, really: 99% of the Flash content on the web is the kind
of thing I'm happier without.


        Stefan

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Richard M Stallman]

    I am not sure, but isn't the version of Flash supported by the Gnash
    player reasonably documented?

I don't know, but even if it is so, it doesn't help much.

Gnash doesn't handle all the constructs that sites use,
so people willing to install user-subjugating software
install the Adobe flash player.  Thus, Flash overall remains
a big encouragement to use non-free software.

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Paul R]

Richard M Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

> The use of Flash is very bad for free software.  If we release
> a video, we should release it _only_ in Ogg Theora.

I see no problem with that personally, probably just like most if not
all people on this list. 

I believe it is a cool representation of emacs hacking, "visually
rewarding" for those who volunteered a lot to get emacs where it is
now. Those people probably have an Ogg Theora media player.

But also, releasing such a media has the potential to reach people
usually not so much interested (yet ?) in free software and cool text
editors. And the more of them can watch it, the best for us.

To be totally honnest, I have no doubt that if we release such a video
in ogg theora, it will end up in flash on youtube the first day. But,
still, I agree that if it is labelled "FSF production", FSF should
provide it in the widely open format Ogg.

-- 
      Paul

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Richard M Stallman]

    But also, releasing such a media has the potential to reach people
    usually not so much interested (yet ?) in free software and cool text
    editors. And the more of them can watch it, the best for us.

That temptation is why I posted.  We must not set aside important
long-term issues for something less important.

    To be totally honnest, I have no doubt that if we release such a video
    in ogg theora, it will end up in flash on youtube the first day. 

That is a big problem, and I have been thinking about how to take
action on the issue.  I'm thinking about making a short video
about this issue to put at the front of all videos we release.

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Richard M Stallman writes:

 >     if we release such a video in ogg theora, it will end up in
 >     flash on youtube the first day.

 > That is a big problem, and I have been thinking about how to take
 > action on the issue.  I'm thinking about making a short video
 > about this issue to put at the front of all videos we release.

Why not simply license it only for free formats?  You're going to have
to use some kind of "invariant sections" clause in any case, or
somebody will just slice the anti-flash speech off when they rip
theora to flash.

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Nick Roberts]

 >  >     if we release such a video in ogg theora, it will end up in
 >  >     flash on youtube the first day.
 > 
 >  > That is a big problem, and I have been thinking about how to take
 >  > action on the issue.  I'm thinking about making a short video
 >  > about this issue to put at the front of all videos we release.
 > 
 > Why not simply license it only for free formats?  You're going to have
 > to use some kind of "invariant sections" clause in any case, or
 > somebody will just slice the anti-flash speech off when they rip
 > theora to flash.

That presumably would only make sense if you are prepared to enforce it.  I
can't see the FSF going to court over a video posted on YouTube.  Awareness is
probably the best you can do. To slice the anti-flash speech off someone would
need to be aware of it.

-- 
Nick                                           http://www.inet.net.nz/~nickrob

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Thomas Lord]

Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Richard M Stallman writes:
>
>  >     if we release such a video in ogg theora, it will end up in
>  >     flash on youtube the first day.
>
>  > That is a big problem, and I have been thinking about how to take
>  > action on the issue.  I'm thinking about making a short video
>  > about this issue to put at the front of all videos we release.
>
> Why not simply license it only for free formats?  You're going to have
> to use some kind of "invariant sections" clause in any case, or
> somebody will just slice the anti-flash speech off when they rip
> theora to flash.
>   

In the early days of GNU proprietary software was used, of necessity,
and supported to attract users, helpers, and attention.  Emacs, GCC,
GDB, and the early shellutils could only be "played" on proprietary
platforms.

GNU components ran first on proprietary platforms but there was
a plausible plan to replace all proprietary components they depended on.

The video situation isn't entirely comparable but not entirely 
different, either.
One of the things missing is any obvious plan or effort to offer a free 
software
alternative to youtube and the like.   Saying "don't use that" amounts to
saying "deprive yourself of access to that functionality and no, we've no
plan to how you can get that functionality back."

-t



>
>
>
>   

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Richard M Stallman]

    One of the things missing is any obvious plan or effort to offer a free 
    software
    alternative to youtube and the like.   Saying "don't use that" amounts to
    saying "deprive yourself of access to that functionality and no, we've no
    plan to how you can get that functionality back."

I think there is a confusion in that statement.
Which functionality do you mean?

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Thomas Lord]

Richard M Stallman wrote:
>     One of the things missing is any obvious plan or effort to offer a free 
>     software
>     alternative to youtube and the like.   Saying "don't use that" amounts to
>     saying "deprive yourself of access to that functionality and no, we've no
>     plan to how you can get that functionality back."
>
> I think there is a confusion in that statement.
> Which functionality do you mean?
>
>   
The ability to publish and view videos published for and viewable on
any "A-list browser", using only binaries from accountable distributors
and to be of sufficient quality to work on all popular platforms without
crashing *too* often, said videos to be made available without incurring
hosting fees for the publisher and to be available for embedding in other
web pages.

Something along those lines.

I admit that, applied to Adobe Flash, the "without crashing *too* often"
is a slight stretch but, in a comparative sense, they seem to lead the pack.

-t

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Richard M Stallman]

    The ability to publish and view videos published for and viewable on
    any "A-list browser", using only binaries from accountable distributors
    and to be of sufficient quality to work on all popular platforms without
    crashing *too* often, said videos to be made available without incurring
    hosting fees for the publisher and to be available for embedding in other
    web pages.

I do not see a way to do this today without opposing and harming the
free software cause.  We must urge people to reject Flash as a
publication format -- we have no choice.

Flash videos are encoded in MPEG4, a patented format whose use we must
oppose in general, whether embedded in Flash or not.  We have no
choice.

Whatever may be the inconvenience of not using that format, we must
choose the inconvenience and reject the format.  It is that or
surrender.

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[David Kastrup]

"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org> writes:

> Richard M Stallman writes:
>
>  >     if we release such a video in ogg theora, it will end up in
>  >     flash on youtube the first day.
>
>  > That is a big problem, and I have been thinking about how to take
>  > action on the issue.  I'm thinking about making a short video
>  > about this issue to put at the front of all videos we release.
>
> Why not simply license it only for free formats?

I don't think that you can define it in a way that will cover future
"free" formats and stop any "non-free" format reliably.  One of the
worst consequences of the overdone copyright protection is bit and media
rot: stuff becomes non-playable at some time without a legal path to
conversion.  That's not what we want to do ourselves.

> You're going to have to use some kind of "invariant sections" clause
> in any case, or somebody will just slice the anti-flash speech off
> when they rip theora to flash.

I don't think that we should prohibit people from picking a bad format
(for some, it might be all they have, and it is really hard to define in
a reliable way that does the right thing in most cases in future), but
we should not set a bad example ourselves.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Paul R]

"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org> writes:

Hello Stephen,

> Why not simply license it only for free formats?  

This would be a counter-productive desision for emacs and for free
software, so I hope we are not going that way.

>                                           You're going to have
> to use some kind of "invariant sections" clause in any case, or
> somebody will just slice the anti-flash speech off when they rip
> theora to flash.

Not worth the effort if the slice is short enough, IMO. Not more than
3 seconds or so.

-- 
      Paul

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Richard M Stallman]

    Why not simply license it only for free formats?

That is an interesting question.  I am not sure it is right to do that.
I will have to think about it.

						      You're going to have
    to use some kind of "invariant sections" clause in any case, or
    somebody will just slice the anti-flash speech off when they rip
    theora to flash.

These are statements of opinion, so we don't permit modification.

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[tomas]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 05:21:19PM -0400, Richard M Stallman wrote:
[...]

[Paul R]
>     To be totally honnest, I have no doubt that if we release such a video
>     in ogg theora, it will end up in flash on youtube the first day. 

...and this would be a Good Thing, I think...

> That is a big problem, and I have been thinking about how to take
> action on the issue.  I'm thinking about making a short video
> about this issue to put at the front of all videos we release.

I see just one reasonable option: *if* there is such a thing as a "good"
Flash video format variant (meaning that Gnash or similar can play
that), spread this one (as "secondary" format, e.g. YouTube et al. -- the
primary on FSF sites would be still OGG/Theora), thus "anticipating"
the format conversion.

Regards
- -- tomás
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFIZImDBcgs9XrR2kYRArFhAJ0dC4mm1/YiIPHXPburYmcI3czc4wCfXzX1
ysry6k6LCNW96aGObo4WbG0=
=+QQl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Richard M Stallman]

    I see just one reasonable option: *if* there is such a thing as a "good"
    Flash video format variant (meaning that Gnash or similar can play
    that),

This is possible but it would not help.

Gnash handles an increasing subset of Flash.  It is possible to make
Flash videos that work with Gnash.  I think that YouTube videos work
with Gnash now.  At least they did 8 months ago.  YouTube's use of
Flash may have changed since then.

But that doesn't solve the problem, because many sites don't work
with Gnash, so users install the non-free Adobe Flash player.

Re: visualization of CVS commits

[Thomas Lord]

Richard M Stallman wrote:
>     I see just one reasonable option: *if* there is such a thing as a "good"
>     Flash video format variant (meaning that Gnash or similar can play
>     that),
>
> This is possible but it would not help.
>
> Gnash handles an increasing subset of Flash.  It is possible to make
> Flash videos that work with Gnash.  I think that YouTube videos work
> with Gnash now.  At least they did 8 months ago.  YouTube's use of
> Flash may have changed since then.
>
> But that doesn't solve the problem, because many sites don't work
> with Gnash, so users install the non-free Adobe Flash player.
>   


All the more reason for the GNU project to make:

1. An ogg version.
2. A flash version uploaded to youtube.

The description of the flash version *and* the content of the
video should encourage the download and use of gnash for those
who can, and an ogg player for others.

I can picture RMS looking into the camera: "Are you watching
this using the Adobe Flash player?  Your freedom is under attack!"

I doubt many if any will download and install Adobe Flash
just to see this one video.

-t




>
>
>