58
New FreeTube fork with Save video playback speed setting for each channel separately (github.com)
submitted 10 months ago by to c/opensource@lemmy.ml
7 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://beehaw.org/post/23975491

The announcement reply in the (from original developers rejected) Feature Request issue: https://github.com/FreeTubeApp/FreeTube/issues/4447#issuecomment-3697918113

And the repository: https://github.com/D3SOX/FreeTube

And for Arch users in the AUR: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/freetube-git-d3sox

There is a new fork of FreeTube that implements a (at least by me) long wished feature: Save video playback speed setting for each channel separately. He plans to do a Flatpak version maybe and its already in the AUR.

I personally have trust issues to run unknown forks and rely on them, for security and other reasons. So for now I won't use it unfortunately. But maybe someone else is interested.

all 7 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Is this fork going to keep up each time g∞gle decides to play cat & mouse? We're about due for another round.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    I have set up a bot that automatically merges upstream code. I already released fixes earlier than FreeTube multiple times now. For example playlists that broke about a week ago are already fixed and released.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago

    I don't know the exact process, but I think its still based on the original, with the changes and additions on top of it. So it depends on the FreeTube team to keep up. I imagine its similar how the Firefox forks work, that still depend on the original Firefox.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 3 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Just seems a little too light on added features for a whole fork. Maybe if the forker does as he says and implements other rejected features it might be worth it. Depending on what those features are.
    Good luck to him.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (1 child)

    Sound like exactly what I have been wanting, though i will never use this fork for something so small and without a Flatpak.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • 3 comments in c/foss@beehaw.org view that post
    [–] 9 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    Is there a fork that has Sponsorblock submissions available?

    That's my biggest downside with FreeTube, the dev is anti-sponsorblock, he just added basic sponsorblock reading because it was too obvious everyone wanted it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •