last.fm as a service?

[Ian Monroe]

On Dec 11, 2007 7:55 AM, Shane King <kde at dontletsstart.com> wrote:
> OK, so I've decided that getting last.fm 1.2 support into Amarok 2 is
> the way to go for something useful to do, which raises a question: is it
> worth trying to fit last.fm into the new services stuff? It seems like
> it should fit there, although it's probably got a bit larger scope than
> the existing services (since it needs to deal with the custom radio
> protocol and scrobbling support).
>
> Opinions? Do it that way? Don't do it that way? Just integrate it like
> the existing one is and worry about making it a service later?
>
> Shane.

I don't really see how it fits with the service framework at all,
outside of it being part of the Internet. :)

Scrobbling is something that happens only when playing local files or
last.fm streams. This isn't something the Service framework provides
for I don't think.

As far as Last.fm streams, there isn't a finite number of Last.fm
streams (ok I suppose they are finite in the strict math sense of the
word, but there are millions of possibilities) like there are of
Shoutcast streams so I don't even get what would be listed in the
last.fm service browser.

So in my opinion Scrobbling should be its own thing, an EngineObserver
like I think it is currently.

LastFm streams should really be just another radio stream type in the
playlist browser, like it is currently in 1.4. Like you can add a
radio station with a URL or you can add a LastFm stream with a
lastfm:// URL or with a dialog to help you construct a lastfm:// URL.
They would be implemented as subclasses of Meta::Track.

Ian