emailconfirmed, nsInternRO, nsInternRW, Administrators
3,356
edits
(Image Links moved to done) |
|||
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
# I need to dramatically increase the maximum upload size, which results in people uploading 10 MB JPGs which will slow down the server and possibly break the thumbnail generator for these huge imgs (as it happened in the past) | # I need to dramatically increase the maximum upload size, which results in people uploading 10 MB JPGs which will slow down the server and possibly break the thumbnail generator for these huge imgs (as it happened in the past) | ||
# I don't know the max allowed upload filesize defined in the server's PHP config, which is definitely restricted as well. So this will make problems, because workarounds must be found (eg. flash-uploader ...) | # I don't know the max allowed upload filesize defined in the server's PHP config, which is definitely restricted as well. So this will make problems, because workarounds must be found (eg. flash-uploader ...) | ||
# What happens when people upload an avi? a mov with mpg2 container? or divx? and | # What happens when people upload an avi? a mov with mpg2 container? or divx? and the webuser doesn't have the right codecs? With the already available video webhosting services, these problems are all automatically handled. | ||
# Very few people consume very much webserver space (and the wiki is already using lots of space, growing constantly) | # Very few people consume very much webserver space (and the wiki is already using lots of space, growing constantly) | ||
# | # I can't see where Vimeo (preferrably) or YouTube are bad. They already provide native players if no flash is found on the system. And I don't have to give support to upload problems and extension updates. And they also test for legal problems (copyrights), which might be bad from an uploader's POV, but it's great from an administrator's POV | ||
--[[User:Mm|Michael]] 11:48, 8 July 2011 (CEST) | |||