Rockbox General > Rockbox General Discussion
Rejection of "ignore the" patch (split from the Evil_G unsupported build thread)
Llorean:
Yes, I pointed that it's part of several standards at the beginning of the explanation. The problem is, people seem to think that the software they choose to use is the only software that exists/matters. They also don't think spreading the use of a good standard is a good idea. :(
I think I'm going to state that from here on out, the argument for "Ignore The" that goes "It's easier / more convenient for my personal method of using it" is restricted. We get the point, we know you LIKE it better, but the idea has been rejected. Arguing for it accomplishes nothing, and since these forums are for discussing the state of official Rockbox, unless you have a new argument for it that you think will change the situation, you don't need to repeat what you've said in favour of it yet again.
soap:
I just want to clarify that I am not against using a pluggin as a solution to doing the tagging. I was simply trying to dispel what I saw as an argument against a PC side application based upon faulty assumptions.
lalittle:
--- Quote from: soap on June 12, 2007, 06:28:30 PM ---No - you merely retag files while they reside on your DAP. Â You keep stressing this point, but it is an invalid one.
--- End quote ---
My point is not invalid -- there is simply a lack of clear communication on this point. Editing these tags outside of Rockbox requires a program that can see and edit these tags, and it requires a script made specifically to do this. This doesn't inherently exist with many of the mainstream audio management programs -- i.e. you can't necessarily do this in many of the most widely used applications used for this. It would most likely require that a new, separate program be downloaded and installed, and a custom script run on the library. After this, since the files had changed, it could likely require the audio management library to be manually "updated" in order to show the correct information for these files.
--- Quote ---There is no need for this process to interfere with your music management program of choice.
--- End quote ---
Again, the mere fact that you'd likely need another, third party program is already a factor, not to mention the fact that re-writing the tags in different applications carries the "potential" (however unlikely) of extra problems. These issues are completely eliminated if the actual unit is used to complete this task. Also, given that at this time, for most users, Rockbox would be the only item that actually made use of these tags (iTunes, JR Media Center and other apps don't use them for their "ignore articles" sorting) it makes sense to put this functionality into Rockbox, allowing users to obtain article free sorting without the need of anything other than the Rockboxed unit itself. This seems like a terrific feature that a lot of people who use iTunes or other mainstream apps would take advantage of.
--- Quote ---As opposed to Rockbox users needing to have prior knowledge of the plugin?
--- End quote ---
The idea is that it would eventually be incorporated into the official build, which Llorean already indicated could be the case when he said "And a plugin like that could surely get accepted into SVN, meaning you wouldn't have to have the hassle of using an unsupported build and depending on someone else for your updates or maintaining the patch." Once this was the case, it would appear in the menu, which would make it visible to anyone without requiring prior knowledge of it's existence.
--- Quote ---Not to split hairs, but it will be a pluggin, not a menu item.
--- End quote ---
I don't understand -- all sorts of plugins have "menu items." Take the iPod "Scroll Wheel Acceleration" for example. This adds adjustments for this feature to the menus.
--- Quote ---Failure to read the manual affects people's knowledge and understanding of the "Random Folder Advance" pluggin. Â How would this one be different?
--- End quote ---
I don't follow you here. My point was simply that with the myriad of features contained in Rockbox, having a menu item would alert people to the presence of this feature. I support the idea of reading the manual, but I also know that this can be a daunting task for a complex item like this, so I also support the idea of making features more "visible," and therefor more "accessible" to the general user base. This is simply the idea of making things more "user friendly."
--- Quote ---Straw man - a broken tagger is a broken tagger. Â A pluggin would be modifying your tags in the exact same fashion as a PC side app.
--- End quote ---
My point was that the original files that reside on the PC would be untouched. Only the files on the Rockbox would be effected if the Rockbox itself took care of this duty.
Larry
Llorean:
Scroll wheel acceleration is not a plugin. Plugins are anything you seen in "browse plugins" or any viewers. Basically, files with the extension .rock. They do NOT show up in the main menus, with one exception (the credits plugin).
You seem to have confused it with the term "patch".
A PC-side program could very easily be run on the files on the DAP.
And I don't believe Rockbox should ever be forced to restrict or limit itself for fear of offending other programs that don't adhere to standards. "Fear of incompatibility" is silly, if that incompatibility is with a program that doesn't support a standard it claims to. If we add support for a standardized format, and another program can't deal with it that's supposed to also support that format, bug reports should be directed to them, rather than requests to us to remove (or in this case not add) or hack around that broken support.
lalittle:
--- Quote from: Llorean on June 12, 2007, 06:45:49 PM ---I think I'm going to state that from here on out, the argument for "Ignore The" that goes "It's easier / more convenient for my personal method of using it" is restricted. We get the point, we know you LIKE it better, but the idea has been rejected. Arguing for it accomplishes nothing, and since these forums are for discussing the state of official Rockbox, unless you have a new argument for it that you think will change the situation, you don't need to repeat what you've said in favour of it yet again.
--- End quote ---
Wait -- did you think I was still arguing for the straight-out "ignore" approach? If so, I've been very unclear. What I've been trying to support in these recent posts is the idea originally suggested by safetydan above, where he suggested using the advanced tags for the "core" of the sorting function, but using a plugin to create these tags on the Rockbox itself. This is what I said earlier "gets my vote," and what I've been attempting to support with these recent posts.
Thanks,
Larry
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version