FanArt and Thumbnails Naming-Standard and File-Structure Convension Rationalisation? - Printable Version
+- XBMC Community Forum (http://forum.xbmc.org)
+-- Forum: Development (/forumdisplay.php?fid=32)
+--- Forum: Feature Suggestions (/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+--- Thread: FanArt and Thumbnails Naming-Standard and File-Structure Convension Rationalisation? (/showthread.php?tid=49801)
- AnalogKid - 2009-07-04 17:34
xexe Wrote:All that really says is "the current way is lacking". This we know.
I agree with all of the above.
But, no OS in the world manages this today. Let alone a media center.
There's only a couple of ways to go with profiles:
a) Either ALL user data (the entire DB and artwork) has to be duplicated for every profile
b) Some aspects of the data are shared.
Consider windows for example. "Folder.jpg" in a given folder will be picked up by ALL profiles. You can't have a different folder.jpg per profile in a given folder. So it's a shared artwork. This is how XMBC is working too, but with the added ability to override that art with your own.
I did have a think about this and thought of the following
Where user is a profile name, OR "default" which means all profiles use it unless overridden, eg
or could be done like this
So user David has his own art
user Susan has her own art
user Andrew doesn't have any art so gets 'default'
This would work and could even incorporate user groups, but this is way off scope for this thread I feel. And probably overkill for all XBMC. At the moment, it's hard enough to get small improvements made (in some areas).
I did say originally that this schema neither improves upon profiles or makes it any worse. But with my comment on how the user COULD store their art in one flat folder (or in profile subdirs), then this would be a solution... (but imposes a rule on the user to store their art in a specific way.
For the future I think... when profiles get THIS powerful, you have to impose restrictions, every OS does!. You just cant write profile specific data into shared folders without issues.
- digitalhigh - 2009-07-04 18:21
AnalogKid Wrote:I agree with all of the above.
I think we should just focus on getting a working schema and someone to implement it. Once we have a model, then start taking considerations for profiles and such.
But, yes, I think the easiest way would be to just have a folder for individual users where all their specific artwork is kept. Or maybe have a root folder, and then a user-specific folder where any extraneous artwork found would override what's in the root.
Still, I think we should work on walking first, then go for the run after we get that down.
- AnalogKid - 2009-07-04 22:58
digitalhigh Wrote:I think we should just focus on getting a working schema and someone to implement it. Once we have a model, then start taking considerations for profiles and such.
Entirely agreed.... we have a grip on it and I'm 100% happy that the schema can't be broken by profiles. We first have to get some developers on board just to get this implemented yet!
- o_dog - 2009-07-14 03:16
not to piss anyone off or anything but what exactly is the problem with the way it's designed today? It works just fine here, multiuser with diffrent art? How many people would actually use that one?
- AnalogKid - 2009-07-14 18:43
o_dog Wrote:not to piss anyone off or anything but what exactly is the problem with the way it's designed today? It works just fine here, multiuser with diffrent art? How many people would actually use that one?
Depends on the question you're asking...
are you asking about art support in general (lots of issues)
or art handling per user (no issues known yet) ?
We are trying to fix the first issue (not the second) but it is fair comment that we should be mindful of the second.... to not screw up multi user systems.
- dleach - 2009-11-16 21:46
What is the status of this effort?
- AnalogKid - 2009-11-16 22:18
dleach Wrote:What is the status of this effort?
Unlikely to be implemented any time soon.
There's only a handful of serious coders working on XBMC, and this effort would be significant.
And whilst the current system's messy, most folks work their way through the mud somehow. Once people have crossed a rickety old dangerous bridge, they feel less inclined to fix it for the next guy, they're already on the other side!
Oh,and (some) skinners just keep hacking away with proprietary fixes to show certain artwork because for any single little bit of artwork, it's easier.
- dleach - 2009-11-17 03:09
I did read through part of this thread, did you put together a wrap up consolidation of your "spec"?
- AnalogKid - 2009-11-19 03:09
dleach Wrote:I did read through part of this thread, did you put together a wrap up consolidation of your "spec"?
Indeed we did...