fabric-video-editor
Video editor that runs in the browser: timeline, text, image, video and audio layers, animations, filters, export with sound. Fabric.js + React + Next.js.
Could not verifysource: GitHubhomepageTypeScriptMITcommit 0d428f6433aa
TypeScript, MIT licensed. The project labels itself: animation, canvas, fabricjs, mobx, nextjs, react, tailwindcss and typescript.
Argusic could not get fabric-video-editor running. An Argusic agent installed it in 25.8 minutes and hit 3 errors and fixed every one without help on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.
npm install succeeds, next dev serves both pages with HTTP 200. next build fails due to insufficient memory for SSR pre-rendering phase.
What the agent ended up with on a clean machine, in its own words. How this is measured
Measured by Argusic on a fresh machine every time. Every number links to its evidence. Argusic Score 80 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).
At a glance
Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page, refreshed . Test data by Argusic (CC BY 4.0); every number links to a run page with the full log, the recording, and their sha256 hashes.
What was measured
From the run that decided this verdict. Every line is a recorded value, not an estimate.
What went wrong, in the agent's own words
The agent's own words, worst first, never rewritten into advice.
- next build fails with OOM (exit 137) during 'Collecting page data' phase - only 770MB RAM available, fabric.js+ffmpeg imports exceed memory during SSR pre-rendering15 minutes
- node-canvas (canvas npm package) cannot be installed - pixman-1 dev library missing and no root to install system packages5 minutes
- npm install has 26 vulnerabilities (3 critical)
- Install time
- 26 minutes
- Cold machine to finish
- 26 minutes
- Errors hit and fixed
- 3 hit, 3 fixed with no human help
- Model tokens used
- 207,675
- Exact commit tested
- 0d428f6433aa
- Container image
- sha256:cdd920bce783
What was not measured
The other half, so you can see exactly how far this evidence goes. A gap is printed as a gap and never filled in.
- How the result was proved
- runs before 2026-09-07 did not record the command used to check the result
- Peak GPU memory
- this ran on a CPU machine, so there was no GPU to sample
- Behaviour over a long run
- each attempt uses the smallest documented settings and a fixed time budget, so this measures whether it runs, not how it holds up under load
- Whether it works at all
- this run verified nothing, so this page makes no claim either way
The end of the recording
The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.
1788589392 exec /bin/sh -lc '# Check when this started - look at .git timestamp stat -c %Y /work/repo/.git/HEAD' in /work/repo succeeded in 0ms: 1788587845 Start: 1788587845, Now: 1788589392. Elapsed: ~1548 seconds ≈ 25.8 minutes. I'm well within the 45 minute limit. Let me compile the final report. tokens used 207,675 Start: 1788587845, Now: 1788589392. Elapsed: ~1548 seconds ≈ 25.8 minutes. I'm well within the 45 minute limit. Let me compile the final report.
Replay the whole session, every command from a clean machine to this point.
How it was tested
One agent, one container, no human help. It installs the project the way its own documentation says to, runs it, and fixes what breaks. Everything below is recorded as it happened: the terminal session, the log and the exact commit. The full method.
Strengths and limits
Measured facts, not opinions. How this is written.
What went well
- Installed in 25.8 minutes.
- Recovered from all 3 errors without a human stepping in, which says the failures are documented well enough to solve.
- Licensed MIT, as reported by its host.
- Measured 2 times, so the result is not a one-off.
What did not, or is not known
- An agent with no time limit did not get it running.
Also tested, in the same area
Every one of these was installed and run by Argusic on a clean machine. Nothing appears here that was not tested.
Run history
| tested by | attempt | outcome | score | cost USD | when |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Argusic Runner | 2/3 | Unverified | 80.00 | 0.12 | |
| Argusic Runner | 1/3 | Unverified | 80.00 | 0.01 |
Topics (from GitHub)
animationcanvasfabricjsmobxnextjsreacttailwindcsstypescriptvideo-editingvideo-editing-softwarevideo-editor
Embed the badge
Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.
[](https://argusic.com/subject/fabric-video-editor)Questions
- Does fabric-video-editor run?
- Argusic could not verify that fabric-video-editor runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 26 minutes, hitting 3 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
- How did Argusic test fabric-video-editor?
- On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 0d428f6433aa. 2 attempts are recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
- What did it cost to test fabric-video-editor?
- The run that produced this verdict cost $0.12: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
- How long does fabric-video-editor take to install?
- 25.8 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.
- Does fabric-video-editor need a GPU?
- Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
- What goes wrong when installing fabric-video-editor?
- 3 things broke in the recorded run, and 3 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.
- Where is the evidence for fabric-video-editor?
- All 2 recorded runs are on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.