Support and General Use > Plugins/Viewers

SNCViewer Lyric Viewer and Sansa c200 c240 c250?

(1/4) > >>

OldiesButGoodies:
I searched and searched the forums last night for hours. Then I googled for any mention of Rockbox that include the lyric viewer plugin for my Sansa c250 player. I came up empty. Like all others that try to get it to work that I've read in various other Rockbox forums, all I get is that message like "this plugin is not supported" or something like that.

Does anyone know of any recent build for the c250 that has or supports this plugin? I don't have the smarts to make my own Rockbox or even begin to know how, even after reading the "how to make your own" pages.

By the way, just who is it that determines what features get supported or not in the main releases of Rockbox? Is it just one or two people that make all the decisions? There seem to be so many wonderful things that others have added in their own builds, like an FM signal strength meter, expanded FM frequency ranges (so you can listen to weather channels and things like that, now crippled in the all main releases), the lyrics viewer, etc. Why are these left out from being supported by all players in the main release of Rockbox? It seems nothing short of a sin to cripple Rockbox like the manufacturers do with their own firmware. Isn't that the whole purpose of Rockbox? To uncripple everyone's players? There should be a place where everyone who writes and uses Rockbox can vote on this stuff.

Llorean:
Why should the users get to vote, exactly? How many of them are going to look at the code underneath the feature and discuss it on a "how it affects the overall project" basis rather than a "Oh, I think this feature is neat" basis?

Most features aren't included because there are significant flaws that need to be fixed first. We often want to include them, but they're done wrong, and the author has no interest in fixing them because he or she just wanted something he himself could use, and didn't really care about making sure it wouldn't interfere with future development.

Many of these features have negative side effects we don't want to introduce, or the author simply hasn't come forward and tried to get it included by asking "What else needs to be done?"

There's a group of over 50 people who decides what goes into Rockbox. In many cases only a small number need to be confident of a patch for it to get in, it's not a total group vote.

We aren't crippling Rockbox. We're making sure that we don't break it entirely by adding everything as soon as each thing works on its own. This is just a way toward significantly buggier software, and we value "it works" over "it can do everything, but crashes every 5 minutes" which is what will happen if we accept features without significant testing and code oversight.

I guess the difference is, we have the patience to wait for these patches to go through testing, and get improved to the point where we're satisfied, while you just want something that works now. Since you don't have the responsibility of being the one people come to when the software locks up, crashes, corrupts data, or otherwise, you don't have to worry about whether things actually work in the long run.

I assure you, if a feature is good, it gets in, in time. Just take a look at how far Rockbox has come over the last two years.

OldiesButGoodies:

--- Quote from: Llorean on September 30, 2008, 03:45:29 PM ---Why should the users get to vote, exactly?

--- End quote ---

Because developers of other open-source projects listen to the needs of the end-users and like to make everyone happy. Too often the programmers are into programming and forget what the end-user really needs, wants, and likes. I used to program 6502 machine language 28 years ago, to make others happy (I've since forgotten all I knew back then, life took a 180-degree course). I listened to what other people wanted and tried to provide it for them whenever I programmed my lowly C64. Without the feedback from the end-users then what's the point of open-source projects? You're back to a totalitarian regime that dictates what everyone else wants, no different than a corporation headed by a few greedy and tunnel-vision CEOs.

It was interesting reading your over-the-top defensive reply to my semi-related ponderings (touched a nerve did I?), but I really just want to find a build that supports the lyric viewer.

Can you answer that one? This is afterall the section for discussing plugins, is it not? You tried to reply to everything but the question about the plugin. Can't you stay on topic?

MarcGuay:
If you can't find a build that has that particular feature patched in (and it sounds like your searching would have turned it up if it existed), you can try and find the person who coded it in the first place and encourage them, or help them, to get it up to snuff so that it can be included in the main builds.

The patch is here in case you hadn't found it already:
http://www.rockbox.org/tracker/task/7432

And the comments generally will explain what still needs to be done.

Llorean:
That's because Unsupported Builds are off topic in these forums, which you probably would've gotten if you read the guidelines, so I responded to the section that was actually a question about Rockbox.

Rockbox is coded for the programmers, not the users. We don't depend on donations, and the target audience is "the people working on it" with considerations for "everyone else we give it away to, for free."

So, frankly, while users considerations are taken into mind, I don't see why that should give them a place in the actual decision making process.

Your defense is "Hey guys, we use your software, so even though we're not the ones writing it, we, being the majority, should get to dictate how you use your spare time."

Seriously, when the programmers are in it for fun (as all of ours are), telling them what they can or cannot work on by way of voting is just a way to discourage them.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page