mediacms VS tubearchivist

Last, host something like https://github.com/mediacms-io/mediacms to serve the optimized files. As long as your clients are not halfway across the world, they should be able to watch the videos with relative ease.

MediaCMS might just be what you are looking for

https://mediacms.io/ is the link.

Sounds like a self hosted youtube could do that. Haven’t tried this yet but someone mentioned it a couple days ago here. https://github.com/mediacms-io/mediacms

Hey, Paul, the only thing I've seen for this on this subreddit or similar places is Media CMS. I don't believe that there is a way to add an ad banner, but I don't know how that works at all, so perhaps there is. Otherwise, videos are rendered in different resolutions to save bandwidth (pre-transcoded when you upload); users indeed are able to upload photos, videos, documents even; download is possible of the content in original, is a Docker compose stack; rendering via GPU can indeed be done via Docker.

I am looking for an app for a similar problem and the best solution I found was mediacms. Unfortunately the setup is not really easy and I couldn't get it to work.

holy hell I hadn't come across archivebox as of yet, I'll definitely be spinning this up this eve. Is the UI comfortable enough to use as a "bookmark manager"? just been setting up tubearchivist for essentially this purpose, wondering if ArchiveBox would essentially do the same

I'm using TubeArchivist to maintain this VERY large collection.

There appears to be a patch in Tubearchivest at https://github.com/tubearchivist/tubearchivist/issues/587

Personally, I use Tubearchivist.

There are others though.

https://github.com/tubearchivist/tubearchivist

I've been seeing TubeArchivist posted a lot recently.

It has been some time since the last release, but v0.4.0 is finally wrapped up. This brings a wide range of fixes and changes, particularly stability improvements, with our new file system naming convention, this should solve a bunch of previously unsolvable compatibility issues. I highly recommend reading the release notes carefully, as the filesystem migration could be a breaking change if you made changes manually there: https://github.com/tubearchivist/tubearchivist/releases/tag/v0.4.0

I saw this was a Django app so I dug around to look at their models. As far as I can tell this is all they have: https://github.com/tubearchivist/tubearchivist/blob/master/t... - just a `Account` model.

It looks like Django + SQLite is used for user accounts, but all other data storage happens in Elasticsearch.

It's an interesting design decision. I would have gone all-in on the database, and used SQLite FTS in place of Elasticsearch for simplicity, but that's my own personal favourite stack. Not saying their design is bad, just different.

Oh, so it is. I happen to run a TubeArchivist at home that grabs the videos and subtitles. Then I can search through the subtitle files for key phrases. I must have grabbed it while it was still public.

You probably want Tube Archivist. The only problem is that it’s naming convention doesn’t work with the Jellyfin YouTube Metadata Plugin.