extragear/multimedia/amarok/src

[Orville Bennett]

On Nov 17, 2008, at 2:19 PM, Lydia Pintscher wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 7:40 PM, Orville Bennett  
> <illogical1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hmmmmm,
>>> not a big fan of this one! Why was this not discussed on the list?
>> Because I got lazy.
>>>
>>> How broken is it currently on OS X?
>> 1. The main window does not resize. You get the default size (based  
>> on
>> your screen resolution) or fullscreen (if you maximize).
>
> Bad. But not TechPreview material imho. Beta!
>
>> 2. Currently the web services don't work. This might be fixable by
>> switching to the xine engine, I haven't had time to test yet.
>
> Ewwwwwww. None of them? _That_ is bad because it is our #1 selling
> point. This needs to be fixed asap.
> If you don't have the time someone else should help you test this.
Last.fm works last time I tried. Magnatunes, not so much. I can't test  
mp3tunes but leo said it did everything except play audio... until  
pressing the stop button and then he got to hear the fadeout.
>
>
>> 3. The /Volumes directory is sometimes missing. This makes accessing
>> external hard drives or UMS mounted media players inaccessible.
>
> Problematic. Any idea why this is happening? Anything other Mac users
> can do to help investigate?
Nope and Nope.
>
>
>> 4. It unfinished with the Qt mac style.
>> It looks like someone took a dump and put lipstick on it with the KDE
>> oxygen style. In short, the UI needs _a lot_ of work.
>
> Screenshots please. But I vote Beta here as well. Looks don't justify
> TechPreview.
Again?

>
>
>> 5. On every launch after the first the screen becomes hidden. New
>> users are highly unlikely to figure out.
>
> Ideas? Ways to investigate?
Something to do with systray.cpp. I noticed it shortly after the  
"updates" markey made to it.
>
>
>> 6. Actually promoting this as a release when it's clearly unfinished
>> will result in FAIL of epic proportions.
>
> Again for the future: I and everyone else in the team need to know
> about this. I don't have a Mac to test this. Same for Windows. I
> depend on feedback I get from those who actually do. All of the above
> needs to be communicated clearly in our messaging from release notes
> to mailinglist and forum postings.
> And as long as noone knows about those problems they are not going to
> get fixed. I understand that you don't have the time to fix all this
> on your own. And you shouldn't need to.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=169831
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=174835
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=171972
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=170199
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=174837
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=170195
well, you get the idea. this is why BRs exist no? In the early days I  
conveniently prefixed them w/ [OS X], now I just make sure that OS X  
is chosen as the title.
Any OS X issues I find are on bko.

>
>
>> 7. Expecting the target audience to compile amarok 2 on os x is
>> ludicrous and my packages suck so bad even I don't want to use them.
>
> Ok expecting them to compile it themself is of course a no-go. How are
> we going to improve the packages? RangerRick? Wait for someone else to
> step up and help you?
RangerRick's has little time, so it looks like the latter.

>
>
>> 8. kded starts and registers global shortcuts. This can wreak havoc
>> with some programs. It drives _me_ absolutely crazy when I'm using
>> Terminal.app.
>
> Hmmm. Can you explain a little more in detail?
Someone thought it would be a good idea to make Amarok's shortcuts  
global so they have focus when amarok doesn't. an annoyance more than  
anything else as actually setting the shortcuts has now be fixed.

>
>
>> 9. I just don't think it's ready and I'd like to avoid a KDE 4.0  
>> style
>> release for amarok on OSX.
>
> We all do, trust me ;-)
> Question is how we do this. Obviously there are major problems. But
> compared to the real TechPreview we released all this sounded okish to
> me so far.
> And some of those problems I weren't even aware of.
>
>>> Does any of this justify calling
>>> it a TechPreview after marketing it as beta for quite some time?
>> #1 all by itself does. The nails're already in the coffin, the rest
>> are additional clamps ensuring it remains sealed.
>>>
>>> Guys, if there are major problems I need to know about them! And I
>>> need to know about them _now_.
>> See above! :-)
>
> Just to make this clear: We need to get our messaging about this
> right. I am questioning if TechPreview is the right name to call it.
> We are going to make it very clear in the release notes and other
> messages that Mac and Windows packages will have more problems than
> the Linux version. But giving it 3 different names on 3 different
> platforms is a really really bad idea imho. The only problem that
> justifies calling it TechPreview is #2. Fixing that should be a
> priority. Once that is fixed I think the other problems justify a Beta
> compared to our other releases so far.
> Suggestions? Comments?
>
>
> Cheers
> Lydia
>
> -- 
> Lydia Pintscher
> Amarok community manager
> kde.org - amarok.kde.org - kubuntu.org
> claimid.com/nightrose
> _______________________________________________
> Amarok-devel mailing list
> Amarok-devel at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/amarok-devel