2014-04-02, 09:43
If no one has done so yet come Friday I'll whip up a PR and see what the rest of the guys think about it.
2014-04-02, 11:33
again .. the only concern all of you have is the usability issue with the left trigger right?
2014-04-02, 13:10
I am happy with the lingertime = 0 setting (tried it on the Pi last night)
2014-04-02, 14:48
(2014-04-02, 11:33)xhaggi Wrote: again .. the only concern all of you have is the usability issue with the left trigger right?
Yes, but its not as simple as that as we explained before...I'm completely satisfied now that I know about the lingertime setting (why it took 12 pages for that little nugget to pop out I'll never know), but I think there will be a lot more people in this boat that will never know about the advancedsettings.xml fix and will ditch XBMC PVR because of this.
It does seem that the vast majority of the people who like past data in their EPG know about the lingertime setting and could enable it themselves if they so chose.
2014-04-02, 15:20
I have also set the Lingertime = 0 setting in advancedsettings.xml. Life is good now. The EPG is more usable when scrolling through it. Thans @xhaggi, for posting the setting up for us. Wish it was set as default but this is good enough for now.
I still would still like to see channel number entry in the EPG view one day as this seems like an industry standard on all cable settop boxes.
Other than that i can't wait till all the other changes get merged into the mainline for future releases of XBMC 13.X or 14.
I still would still like to see channel number entry in the EPG view one day as this seems like an industry standard on all cable settop boxes.
Other than that i can't wait till all the other changes get merged into the mainline for future releases of XBMC 13.X or 14.
2014-04-02, 15:36
2014-04-02, 15:40
(2014-04-02, 14:48)LSU Jonno Wrote:(2014-04-02, 11:33)xhaggi Wrote: again .. the only concern all of you have is the usability issue with the left trigger right?
Yes, but its not as simple as that as we explained before...I'm completely satisfied now that I know about the lingertime setting (why it took 12 pages for that little nugget to pop out I'll never know), but I think there will be a lot more people in this boat that will never know about the advancedsettings.xml fix and will ditch XBMC PVR because of this.
How could I forget it. don't get mad at me, but it wasn't part of the wiki
2014-04-02, 15:42
@Talguy: do you mean you'd like to see the channel number next to the name or the ability to jump to a specific channel by entering a number on your remote?
2014-04-02, 20:42
2014-04-02, 20:52
(2014-04-02, 15:40)xhaggi Wrote:(2014-04-02, 14:48)LSU Jonno Wrote:(2014-04-02, 11:33)xhaggi Wrote: again .. the only concern all of you have is the usability issue with the left trigger right?
Yes, but its not as simple as that as we explained before...I'm completely satisfied now that I know about the lingertime setting (why it took 12 pages for that little nugget to pop out I'll never know), but I think there will be a lot more people in this boat that will never know about the advancedsettings.xml fix and will ditch XBMC PVR because of this.
How could I forget it. don't get mad at me, but it wasn't part of the wiki
Not mad. You guys do great work. I just thought it was funny that we had 12 pages of belly aching over the gaining the ability to disable a feature that we already had the ability to disable...we just didn't know it.
2014-04-05, 16:28
2014-04-05, 19:52
I couldn't have said it better myself!
(2014-04-01, 21:01)LSU Jonno Wrote: It seems that the only people who want this feature are XBMC "power users" and they already know the feature exists and can be enabled in advancedsettings.xml.
Your everyday user is going to futz around with this feature, not like it, and not use XBMC before discovering an advancedsettings.xml even exists, much less how to use it to turn off this feature.
2014-04-05, 22:22
I'm against adding settings to work around usability issues of a feature that was added. Even if we would want to add a gui setting for it (so not an advanced setting), then it's way too late for Gotham to do this and the first time I was asked about adding a setting for it, strings were already frozen for this release. So a setting wasn't going to be added for it anyway.
Two options for this release:
- fix the usability issue (and not by defaulting linger time to 0, which changes the old behaviour and affects people on networks that don't provide exact starting times for programs)
- revert the commits that added the feature and look at it again for Gotham+1
Two options for this release:
- fix the usability issue (and not by defaulting linger time to 0, which changes the old behaviour and affects people on networks that don't provide exact starting times for programs)
- revert the commits that added the feature and look at it again for Gotham+1
2014-04-05, 22:57
(2014-04-05, 22:22)opdenkamp Wrote: - fix the usability issue (and not by defaulting linger time to 0, which changes the old behaviour and affects people on networks that don't provide exact starting times for programs)Would a default lingertime of say, 15 be acceptable?
Large enough to get around the exact starting time problem but small enough that default behaviour is not hugely different to Frodo for a casual user.
2014-04-05, 22:59
I think that I'd be okay with an hour of prior guide data. That'd be enough for most users to see that the feature is available, without driving people crazy.
