Felipe,
Allow me to reply starting from one of your last your statements:
On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 03:46 +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> We are now in June and I haven't heard anything.
This is just not true. To your inquire back in April, this is what I
replied:
https://garage.maemo.org/pipermail/mafw-lastfm-devel/2010-April/77.html
I thought you'd follow up with what I commented as the two main reasons
why I didn't consider libscrobble at that point yet, but since you
didn't I just continued fixing issues in my code as time allowed.
>
> 1) Support for multi-scrobbling (both last.fm and libre.fm at the same time)
>Includes a song queue per service.
I haven't worked on this yet, because I was fixing other issues that
were more important. I list them below, even when I am sure that you
know already.
> 2) Improved song queue handling
>Since internally it uses libscrobble (which is independent of MAFW),
>the important code can be easily tested on desktop sw, and it has
>been done so… throughly.
>It doesn’t matter how flaky your network is, or that the servers are
>down, the songs will be submitted.
I have fixed all the issues with the network handling for at least a
month now (these were released in 0.0.5). I also implemented support for
scrobbling behind proxies[1], which is in a branch in gitorious waiting
to get some testing from users.
> 3) Permanent storage
>The song queue is not lost, even on crashes, device reboots, or
>software updates.
I have also implemented permanent storage during last week and it's
working fine. I am planning to do a release including this during this
week, but I was waiting for some translations to come in first [2].
> 4) Video clips are ignored
>Small feature, but important.
In the same email I link above, I replied to you that I wasn't against
implementing this if there was broader interest from users. Since I
didn't get much more feedback on this regard it was low in my
priorities.
> [...]
> Then I brought up all the problems to the mailing list [1], and I tried to
> contribute to mafw-lastfm [2], some trivial patches got in, but the
> important ones [3] did not. That was back in February, and at that
> point Claudio (the maintainer) decided to wait until a stable release
> (0.0.4), which was done in April. We are now in June and I haven't heard
> anything.
Well, as I said already, I told you clearly what were my concerns
regarding libscrobble. Instead of following up on the discussion, you
preferred to go your own way and implement yet another scrobbler. Good
on you.
> So I decided to implement the missing pieces and provide what IMO is
> supperior software (at the very least it does what I need, and hopefully
> you would like it too).
I don't how to take this. Unfortunately, I was waiting for your feedback
on my comments. I apologize if you were expecting something different.
I don't know if it was necessary for you to go your own way and
implement your own scrobbler, but in the end it's up to you. In a normal
case I'd be glad to see alternative software, because competition is
healthy, but in this case I find it a bit ridiculous – it's such a small
software that it barely makes sense to offer people two different ones
that in the end will obviously do the same. But that's your way, and
you're free to do it.
Claudio
[1] https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9966
[2]
https://garage.maemo.org/pipermail/mafw-lastfm-devel/2010-June/000106.html
___
maemo-users mailing list
maemo-users@maemo.org
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
