CasparCG
Http/Websocket control system...
TODO@k0d : Define this issue properly!!!
Description
A clear and concise description describing to us how your feature/enhancement request should work.
Solution suggestion
A clear and concise description if you have an idea about a solution.
Additional information
If you have some additional information or attachments.
We can use the Launcher project as a starting point, adding simple buttons to directly interact with the server (DIAG, COLORs, etc) and serve a static admin page on the built in express server. It also runs the Scanner with a watch dog (WIP as of December 2018) and can run other 3rd party processes (we use it for Elgato Streamdeck control++):
https://github.com/nrkno/tv-automation-casparcg-launcher/releases
@jesperstarkar This looks interesting, my thoughts are to have a websocket server built into the CCG server, which would either implement AMCP over websockets, or some new protocol if more suitable. Then clients (native/mobile/web etc) could talk directly to the websocket server. We could also serve up a static page using some embedded webserver inside of CCG (for example mongoose), that could be more of an 'admin/monitoring' kind of page instead of a 'control system'. Hope you understand what I mean by that :)
This is really interesting request actually and right in time. I have been looking at the repository that @jesperstarkar already linked to above and the idea is great. I have plans for building (or/and contributing to the launcher) with operations in mind. This repository will be available at SVT GitHub initially. I wouldn't mind transferring the repository to CasparCG organization when we have at a first working version.
Under this day the repository will be created and a simple roadmap with upcoming features will be added to the README of that repository.
Sounds interesting?
@k0d my thoughts are to have a websocket server built into the CCG server
#688 :)
I would sort out a specification for the websocket communication first. This issue I created was really to have an in-built web-admin panel to use instead of the terminal console. Of course, it could be good to create a client application that can interface with the server over websockets...but I feel that is secondary to this issue. Meaning, we should create a new issue for that...