Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
One of the aspects that have plagued feature development on hls.js has been the accessibility to streams that have the relevant aspect included in the stream.
It would be great if people were able to generate new or find test assets (with an appropriate license!) that included aspects that the project could add to the CI stack. They don't need to be accessible online, because we can likely find a place to put them for long term project usage.
Currently needed streams
- Modern packaged content (hlsv7+):
- MPEG-TS - shaka packager / bento4 output
- CMAF - shaka packager / bento4 output
- Features
- VOD stream (cmaf) with known inserted EMSGs (#2360)
- VOD stream (cmaf/mpegts) with AES-128 encrypted out of band captions (#3051)
- Stream with HDCP test content to ensure we get out of the way for external usage.
- In stream CEA708's marked with INSTREAM-ID in playlist to indicated the Service channel.
You tell us! Come in and ask in Slack if a certain stream type is needed, or submit a PR! Much appreciated 鉂わ笍
Describe the solution you'd like
A PR submitted with a test stream added to the unit tests, and what features that stream has in it.
If you can't donate the bandwidth for long-term CI usage, or it isn't your bandwidth to donate, include the stream as a ZIP in the PR, or get in contact on the video-dev Slack in the #hlsjs chat.
Please, only provide streams that you legally are allowed to!
Describe alternatives you've considered
Requiring a test-stream to go along with a feature-request. But this raises the bar for people who request features, it's definitely something that would be nice to receive, but I don't think it's something that should be required. It can be a lot of work to get content available with the correct features and be able to be shared without rights issues.
itsjamie
All 3 comments
Great topic. I full agree.
We should be much stronger in having much better test-content database with better sorted categories and cases. I think it looks messy and dodgy what we have - to honestly say it - for being the most popular player out there. Not wanting to blame anyone or anything here for it - but I think it is important to point out there is a big deficiency here.
We are usually creating/packaging content for prod or testing in live or VOD with FFmpeg or GStreamer solely. I have never use the "commercial" packagers that you mention, except via integrated into various online SaaS APIs, because it was DRM packaging.
Modern packaged content
Do you need Bento or Shaka-Package to produce the streams you want, or is that an option among others?
What would be (if any) the difference or lacking features to ouput created with FFmpeg (or even GStreamer)?
Can you be more specific in what exactly you want to have for characteristics in the MPEG-TS packaging? What do you mean with hlsv7+ in that context?
tchakabam
on 2 Oct 2020
We should be much stronger in having much better test-content database with better sorted categories and cases. I think it looks messy and dodgy what we have - to honestly say it - for being the most popular player out there. Not wanting to blame anyone or anything here for it - but I think it is important to point out there is a big deficiency here.
Agreed, the sorting and what features each stream is intended to test could definitely be better sorted so we have a clear idea of what is being tested. I will say, the nice part that we do currently do is make sure that issues reported don't regress with adding ticketed streams to the CI setup. I wouldn't want us to lose that with whatever new structure got proposed.
I have never use the "commercial" packagers that you mention, except via integrated into various online SaaS APIs, because it was DRM packaging. Do you need Bento or Shaka-Package to produce the streams you want, or is that an option among others?
The fact that their integrated into the various online SaaS APIs is why I feel like we should have at least a few assets we know are produced using these packagers / encoders / libraries. The vast majority of users who integrate with the various SaaS providers are going to receive something produced with at least one of the four software solutions (ffmpeg, gstreamer, bento4, shaka) in the mix somewhere in the chain 99 times out of a 100.
What would be (if any) the difference or lacking features to ouput created with FFmpeg (or even GStreamer)?
Given the small differences they have in the media they generate it would be good to just ensure we get a modern file from their latest branches to ensure compatability. Example I'm personally aware of is the keyframe metadata in the MP4 metadata that each report is quite different, and on older Chrome versions that bit hard on the migration to using the AVC keyframe data rather than the container metadata. I'm not aware of any current issues that happen, but this is why I felt it was useful.
What do you mean with hlsv7+ in that context?
_Wishlist_ -- Hopefully utilizing features like:
- byte-range playback from a single file
- CEA708s (or 608's in 708) with a
EXT-X-MEDIAwith aINSTREAM-IDofSERVICE<n> - HDCP test content that indicates the HDCP level via HLS
- externalized PAT/PMT packets via EXT-X-MAP of MPEG-TS content.
- not even sure which encoders would support this out of the box, but the extra packets are unnecessary for an MPEG-TS encoded piece of content only destined to be served via HLS and it'd be nice to have tested support for https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8216#section-3.2
itsjamie
on 3 Oct 2020
The dash.js demo page does a really nice job of organizing samples with the "Stream" select box, it's sub categories and the "provider" credit in the title (ex: "VOD > [Wowza] Static Timeline").
robwalch
on 9 Oct 2020
Related issues
neuman
路
4Comments
harbinha
路
3Comments
eteubert
路
3Comments
sbrez
路
3Comments
ronag
路
4Comments