Forum user: Tero Author of jQuery Tools and this website + JavaScript developer of Flowplayer.

Biggest changes include

- Toolbox will be dropped
- CSS3 transitions in favor to jQuery animate / fadeTo / fadeIn etc.
- method and property names will change so that they are consistent across tools
- Different kind of default HTML layouts

So 2.0 will definitely *not* be backwards compatible. That's for sure.

right now the feature set of the current release is freezed.

2.0 is on it's way and will replace the current one.

Right now I'm focusing on 2.0 and 1.2 branch is not my priority when it comes to new features. Sorry.

Scroll down to this page and you see my latest status update:

http://flowplayer.org/tools/forum/20/66697

Here is a little status update.

• 2 month break is over and back on the laptop
• during the break while my kids were sleeping I did manage to write JQT 2.0 :)
• approx. 70% smaller codebase! seriously.
• the website and demos needs to be done == ~80% still undone
• two separate launches: tools & form tools. form tools not ready yet

I'm happy.

sorry, but no plans for those.

Alex Libby is giving a helping hand for 1.2.6.

He started a new thread.

http://flowplayer.org/tools/forum/20/67056

Sorry folks

I've been a bad open source contributor. Lazy, ignorant, absent and false promises. The latest commit on jQuery Tools master branch is from October 14, 2010 and the site has been crashing hard during the last year because of DDOS attacks. 5000+ different servers were hitting on us from Turkey. I'm happy (and sometimes sad) to see that there's a high interest on the project after all this.

This is why I must at least inform you what the heck is going on.

1.2.6

Caolan Mc Mahon has been working on this bug-fix release to make it work on all browsers and with the latest jQuery. I'll request him to answer on this thread to give the status of the update. We'll release this together with a new (static) website.

2.0

I made a decision to go with a full rewrite. The next release will be totally different and not backwards compatible. You've been warned. After writing some 1.3 code I realized that I have to take another path since technologies have advanced so much during the past year. Especially CSS. I'm actually quite motivated now since I have a clear picture on my mind. Not very much details here but one thing I can reveal: the role of CSS will increase.

Few things are granted

• the new code will be around 40% smaller.
• everything: the code, documentation and demos will be rewritten
• I got a second child and I'm on 10 week break right now
• 2.0 *will* be released at some point. I'm committed to it and I'm working on it.

I know you are all looking for deadlines. This is what hurts so let's be honest. At least 2 months for 1.2.6 and 8 months for 2.0. I try not to fail this time and give you something to see before the production release. I'll post things on this thread.

are you using the commercial version of the player?

http://releases.flowplayer.org/flowplayer/flowplayer.commercial-3.2.6.zip

multiple-players.html is a good way to switch players. that is the method we definitely prefer and our player supports this "natively". I'm glad if you can setup your players like that.

I won't change my approach at all. However my approach against upgrades, bug fixes, information exchange is not the best one. Will try to improve on that. Still a lot of work to do on the site, forums etc to get into the (real) JQT work.

what happens if you just reinstall the player again on the same container. essentially calling the same flowplayer() call twice.

I did that on this page:

http://flowplayer.org/demos/installation/index.htm

and entered this command on the browser's console:

flowplayer("player", "http://releases.flowplayer.org/swf/flowplayer-3.2.6.swf");

Worked for me on Chrome.

What happens when you attempt to post a support item? What browser? JavaScript enabled? We can see new support requests appearing all the time so this might be a browser issue or something.

Thank you for the demo suggestions! Makes sense. The idea should be that you first "build" your player: configure playlist, streaming and looks and then start browsing trough the demos with that player. I've had this on my mind quite some time actually and is on the list of things to do.

I'll do that. Let's hope you are in Bahamas by then!

Argh. I need a third hand.

Probably ends up being a hiring process.

totally agree. even graphic designers benefit if they have at least some understanding of CSS. I strongly dislike web based content management and prefer to use my own editor and simple text files.