Support Embedding as Native Videos

[Malix-Labs]

Embedding as native videos (WebM, MP4, MOV, ...) would be particularly useful for GitHub Video Player

Past

• Feature | Support Embedding as Native Videos asciinema#671 :

  * 🚀 reaction from @Pablohn26

  @ku1ik :

  Not in scope of this project, sorry.

  @Malix-Labs :

  how would that not be in scope ?

  I would understand you do not want to support it, but I fail to understand how it could not be in the scope ?

  @ku1ik :

  What makes it in scope other than developer's vision for the project?

  @ku1ik :

  If you want to discuss this further you're welcome to do this on the forums, as the issue template (which you ignored) asked you to do.

  @ku1ik : *locked and limited conversation to collaborators

  • My response here:

    I still do not understand how it is not in the scope and again would very much understand if you just would not want to support it

    About "the issue template (which you ignored) asked you to do" :

    There is no issue template about feature request in https://github.com/asciinema/asciinema :
    
    Proof : https://github.com/asciinema/asciinema/tree/develop/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE

[ku1ik]

I still do not understand how it is not in the scope and again would very much understand if you just would not want to support it

Well, yeah, I don't want to support it, therefore it is not in scope :) Are we just talking about semantics here?

There is no issue template about feature request in https://github.com/asciinema/asciinema :

Exactly. There isn't because I don't want feature requests in the issue tracker. The bug report template says this:

Ideas, feature requests, help requests, questions and general discussions should be discussed on the forum: https://discourse.asciinema.org/

I suppose you chose the "Blank issue" option, and haven't seen this information. If that's the case then sorry for assuming you ignored it!

[Malix-Labs]

Well, yeah, I don't want to support it, therefore it is not in scope :) Are we just talking about semantics here?

Yes, closing as not in scope and closing as not desired is not the same thing according to ITIL

Probably too picky on my side, sorry about the confusion :)

and haven't seen this information

Yes, I haven't clicked on bug report unfortunately

I submitted asciinema/asciinema#673 to fix that!