On 23/04/2008, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:

2008/4/23 Graham Pearce grahamwp@jazi.net:

...

I'd like the upload limit to be raised to at least 40MB. I'd like to upload some free classical music from Pandora Music that is more than 20MB and cannot be split easily without a loss in quality. For example:

I think this is desperately needed. There are plenty of audio files larger than 20MB (such as read articles, other spoken files, classical

This need is well known as I understand it, so I assume it'll be raised as soon as we think we can keep up with the disk and backup requirements. SEND MOAR MONEY. Or something.

- d.

In an ideal world, where we wouldn't have problems with disk and backup requirements, 40 mb is still a very low maximum. I have lots of videos from the Wikimedia Conference Netherlands 2007 which last over an hour and are impossible to compress to a size under 40mb. The original DV files are around a 10 GB per hour and can be compressed to a reasonable quality for about 1GB per hour. To host these (freely licensed and relevant files) i now have to either upload them to a local server or rely on services like archive.org or YouTube.

-- Hay / Husky

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Brianna Laugher brianna.laugher@gmail.com wrote:

Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12595 12595 Increase Commons file size upload limit to 40MB

cheers, Brianna.

On 23/04/2008, Oldak Quill oldakquill@gmail.com wrote:

...

I think this is desperately needed. There are plenty of audio files larger than 20MB (such as read articles, other spoken files, classical music, historical recordings) that could instantly be uploaded, there are many, many more video files larger than 20MB that could be uploaded (historical, scientific, educational, &c.). Also, TIFFs which are important for historical and scientific documentation and archive often exceed 20MB. Related to the use of TIFFs, lossless audio formats which would be useful for Commons almost necessarily exceed 20MB.

-- They've just been waiting in a mountain for the right moment: http://modernthings.org/

---

Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 9:41 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:

archive.org is better than nothing for now, or do they have onerous requirements?

I haven't looked into archive.org (yet). My feeling was that Wikimedia-related files should be hosted on Wikimedia servers, not on an external site (even if that site is very 'friendly' towards our type of content by allowing CC-licenses to be added to files). However, until Tim's proposal with the drop-box is really built archive.org is of course a good (temporary) solution.

-- Hay / Husky

On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 12:39 AM, Platonides Platonides@gmail.com wrote:

You should (ab)use the offering Erik did once of manually moving the files to the servers with his sftp account (I hope not being confusing the individual!)

That's a nice one-time solution, but i don't think Erik would like to be bothered several times a day whenever somebody wants to upload a file larger than 40 MB :)

-- Hay / Husky

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 3:23 PM, Tim Starling tstarling@wikimedia.org wrote:

40MB is useless, almost as useless as 20MB. I'd like to see it increased to 1GB, but structured as an unprivileged temporary drop-box on a separate server with trusted user intervention required to get it from there to the wiki.

That seems like a sensible idea. So, this would happen if you would upload files larger than a certain size? I might imagine that it would also be handy to offer alternatives to uploading by HTTP to the 'drop-box server', such as FTP or maybe SFTP. Even though uploading via HTTP seems to be very common these days you still have the problem that you might accidentally close the browser window after uploading 95% of your 1GB YouTube movie :)

-- Hay / Husky