Philip Meyer;423668 Wrote: > >BS. the two i named were that the scanner doesn't pick up changes, > >(without a full clear and rescan) thats a BUG, and i don't care if > you > >don't agree with such an obvious thing. > > > Of course that's a bug - I raised it! But, there's no faulty logic, > design, non-de facto standards, voodoo, whatever you want to moan about > - just a bug that in some situations, a scan for changes to files > doesn't always work. A full rescan always works, so the logic for how > scanning works is generally good.
this is so damn common in these back n forths with you... you lose all track of the context of your own questions and comments as well as mine, and in so doing, create a strawman for which you expect me to answer, which of course is NONSENSE on your part! its maddening... take the above, the original context of my very first post was: > "...trying to find common ground between these two camps should not be a > mutually exclusively proposition, however, current bugs, of which there > are many, make it difficult to even address the issue." do you see me saying that the bugs THEMSELVES are the INTRINSIC UNDERLYING problem with "faulty logic, design, non-de facto standards, voodoo, whatever you want to moan about" as you put it? NO, you don't. what i did CLEARLY say, is that the bugs make ADDRESSING those things [that i want to address to satisfy both camps] almost impossible, b/c they are in the way of actually seeing what SC either is doing, or is trying/intending to do. so go back and read it again. in your reply to my first post, you asked "such as?" regarding scanning bugs. i had ALREADY given you two and bugzilla has plenty more. they serve as my evidence that its hard to address the underlying issue of the 'two camps problem,' b/c as i made clear, i feel they get in the way of doing that and obfuscate the possible solutions. i NEVER said the bugs WERE the root problem. make no mistake, i see the PARADIGM as the root problem, and the bugs as obfuscation to make adjustments to the paradigm to come up with a good solution that both camps would enjoy. --- and btw, you raised a version of that bug, based on another discussion we were having, but others before you had pointed out that the "half ass" scans didn't pickup new/different things *prior to your bug,* like artwork for example. you just pinpointed comp tags. i'd guess it misses more than just art and comp tags, further obfuscating what it does and making it hard to come up with a solution for both camps, which is what i said in my first post is my goal and shouldn't be a mutually exclusive proposition. Philip Meyer;423668 Wrote: > > >the other was that if you have "Various Artists" as a string your > music > >DISAPPEARS! thats a BUG, OBVIOUSLY. > > > Yes, but caused because tags aren't right; it's a symptom, not a cause. > I'm not saying its not a bug, but if tags were set more meaningfully, > there wouldn't be a problem. I mean how often are there albums by > "Various Artists" that are not compilation albums? caused b/c tags aren't right??? hahaha, thats LAUGHABLE. earlier in this thread anyway, you AGREED that a string shouldn't cause music to disappear, NOW SUDDENLY you reverse yourself and blame the STRING and not the holy SC! god, gimmie a break! and the music disappears if the album has that string in whatever tag SC calls album artist. it doesn't matter if the album (or track) in reality is, or isn't, a comp. on what authority do you say a user or an online DB or another app shouldn't put ANY STRING they want in there? i say this next bit with all due respect, and i do respect your vast knowledge and SC abilities, but... ...even if you hold your logic superior to all others, which would be very arrogant on something as subjective as a string value in a tag, who cares? THE REALITY IS NOT, AND WILL NOT, JIVE WITH WHAT YOU THINK BEST, PERIOD. just as you can't do ANYTHING about TPE2 being hijacked by ill behaved apps, you also can't do anything about users, apps, & DBs using strings you don't approve of in places you don't approve of. frankly, you need to get over your disapproval and acknowledge REALITY. don't get mad at me, i'm just the messenger! nothing you say or do will change what i just laid out, so why continue to fight it? Philip Meyer;423668 Wrote: > > >for instance, i should be able to sort via any tag i want. i should > be > >able to turn artwork on or off from anywhere. > What you are talking about is a richer UI; these things are not bugs, > but enhancement requests. this is where i just lose all patience... NO DUH! when did i say they were bugs????!?!?!?!? HINT: I DIDN'T! again, go back to my original post, my desire was to try to find COMMON GROUND between two camps who approach SC from totally different perspectives. the only reason i mentioned bugs was to show that they make approaching the problem difficult if not impossible. i firmly believe that common ground between the two camps is possible, IF both sides are willing to understand the needs of the other, and if some patently ridiculus bugs are fixed first. so... fix the current scanning bugs, and THEN we can address the issues, like the one you quoted by me above, in a way that would satisfy both camps. Philip Meyer;423668 Wrote: > The scanner works, the DB holds the information, there's no back-end > issue. In fact, third-party plugins have already implemented these > things - Try Moose or Erlands CustomBrowse plugin for a new world of > browsing options. maybe one day i will, but that is not the heart of the issue, nor do i think its a good longterm solution, (esp as they are all about to be broken by new SC versions). i think SC is missing some really basic elements any decent music library app should have in its core. Philip Meyer;423668 Wrote: > > >i should have more options to define what is and isn't a comp then > just the VA logic or > >explicit comp tags. > > > There are already two ways of doing it, which I won't explain again. > It really is simple. How many options are there in WinAmp for defining > what is and isn't a comp? none. winamp doesn't need to know what is and isn't a comp, b/c gracenote puts strings in TPE2 that indicate its a comp. but winamp is also different from SC... SC WANTS TO KNOW what is and isn't a comp, and then it does things based on that, (and 3rd party SC apps make use of that info as well). thats another issue i have with SC, what it does with the info. i don't likehow it handles comps. and again, thats why i'm in the second camp, but i never said it was a BUG! Philip Meyer;423668 Wrote: > > >BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, SC needs to respect de facto standards > > > Give me a break - what de facto standard do you believe it doesn't > follow now? SC covers more file format, tag types, standards than > anything else that I am aware of. before i answer that, do you, or do you not, acknowledge that TPE2=ALBUM ARTIST is, in fact, a de facto standard? as i mentioned, using strings in TPE2 for comps (OR non-comps) is a widespread de facto standard, including using "Various Artists" especially as the string. Philip Meyer;423668 Wrote: > > >the INDISPUTABLE FACT that many tagging sources ALWAYS fill in "album > >artist" comp or not. > > > Well, I dispute that. Using Mp3Tag for example, which is the de facto > tool around here for tagging music, it looks up metadata from FreeDB, > Amazon or Discogs.com, and doesn't, retrieve album artist tag data. mp3tag? r u serious? and it has what market share? meanwhile itunes, winamp, windows media player, gracenote (cddb), and on and on all fill in that info, (and do it in TPE2 mind you). as to whether or not amazon and discogs have that info, i don't know, but just b/c mp3tag doesn't use it doesn't necessarily mean it isn't there. i do think freedb doesn't store that info however. Philip Meyer;423668 Wrote: > Anyway, so what? SC can be set up to read the tag if it's there, and > works if it's not. define "work." the fact is that SC does not work well or optimally for many users. take someone who ripped everything with WMP. they have to decide if TPE2 should be treated as album artist or not. EITHER WAY SC won't work well. either nothing will be called a comp, OR lots of things that aren't comps SC will identify as a comp. you may think thats how it should be, i say thats nonsense. SC should be, and could be, better, and do it WITHOUT negatively impacting the first camp. Philip Meyer;423668 Wrote: > > >what bothers me about your opposition is that i don't think doing all > >this would impact you in the slightest! i think more flexability for > >others would not mean a break with how it works now. its just a > matter > >of options. > > > Developers are very anti adding new options, because they believe > there's too many for new users to get their head around. I generally > disagree, but agree to some extent. How options are presented is more > important (show basic ones, hide advanced options, etc). Some changes > could also break third-party plugins. i think we fully agree on that. -- MrSinatra www.lion-radio.org using: sb2 & sbc (my home) / sbr (parent's home) - w/sc 7.3.3b - win xp pro sp3 ie8 - 3.2ghz / 2gig ram - 1tb wd usb2 raid1 - d-link dir-655 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ MrSinatra's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2336 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=57922 _______________________________________________ beta mailing list beta@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/beta
