On 04/29/2014 12:23 PM, Raine M. Ekman wrote: > Citerar Vesa <[email protected]>: >> If there has to be an option for downloading presets/samples/whatever >> from LSP or elsewhere, fine... but it should be configurable, it should >> not break existing functionality, and it needs to be implemented better. >> >> Particularly, the file browser shouldn't get broken so horribly as in >> these pictures: >> >> http://www-user.tu-chemnitz.de/~doto/lmms/lmms-goes-online-2.png > Nothing too horrible about that if we stick to the parts relevant to > network resources.
As lead UI developer, I declare that it IS horrible. I have reasons! - The sidebar we have right now is fine. Why mess with that? It has good separation of categories. Presets in one tab, projects in another, etc... - Why smash all of these in one single tab? It just makes things harder to find. From a UI perspective, it's a downgrade. - Online and local resources in the same tab. Big NO. For reasons I've already explained. > That's a "nobody has even suggested it", I hope. Google can pull it > off with billions in infrastructure and infinite (smart) code monkeys, > but LSP? Hardly. Well, how often does the current code that is in old master poll LSP? Will the current or future LSP be able to handle it when it's in a production version of LMMS? This is also something we need to consider. > I thought polling in the background, caching and stuff like that could > solve most of these problems? Polling online resources in the background... in an audio software, requiring realtime performance... what could go wrong? This is exactly what I DON'T want to happen. I don't want LMMS to waste resources on pointless web bling that I will never ever need or want. If there is any polling of online resources, it should happen ONLY when the user asks for it. Anything else is just asking for problems... I already have a solution for this: - add a tab in the sidebar that contains ALL online stuff - online resources will be polled ONLY when this tab is clicked... before that, LMMS doesn't do _anything_ with online stuff Doing it this way would prevent 99% of the potential stupidity and problems this update can cause. > ... but obviously not if this is a hard requirement. Or would you > settle for a checkbox like "refresh LSP resources in background" as > explicit enough? No, what? I just said this shouldn't cause wait times at startup... we don't want huge wait times when LMMS starts up. Doing it only when the online tab is clicked solves the problem. All other times, LMMS doesn't know or care about web at all. That would be the best way - people who don't care about web functionality (like me) can just completely ignore that one tab. > Your "proper separation" is really mostly about a minor UI detail, > which probably is the easiest thing to change in this whole discussion. It's not minor, it's crucial. Esp. because of the reasons above. I don't want to waste CPU resources in pointless polling of online resources, I want LMMS to save those resources for actual production work. I do projects where I'm right at the limit of the CPU meter - sometimes over it where some parts of my tracks can't be reliably played back even. I'm sure I'm not the only one... In order to only do the polling when it's needed, we need to separate the online resources in their own corner. Where they're only cared about when the user asks for them. It doesn't matter if there's a slight wait time when the user clicks the online tab - that's expected and normal (although it shouldn't hang up the software even then). As long as that wait time is confined to only the times when the user clicks the online tab. > I'd like to see this network stuff separated into a helper program of > some kind. Something like a cloud storage or version control client, > possibly with LMMS only reading files from a local directory. How's > that for separation? I think version control may be a bit overkill for the kind of things we want. Do we really need version control for presets and such? Isn't it enough to just search for presets in different categories in the LSP? Do we really need to make this so complicated? Anyway, a helper program can be a good idea, if it's done smartly... all the other points still stand even with a helper program. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available. Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free." http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs _______________________________________________ LMMS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel
