Adding tracks to the collection

[Bart Cerneels]

On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 8:53 AM, Maximilian Kossick
<maximilian.kossick at googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 4:58 AM, Ian Monroe <ian at monroe.nu> wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Seb Ruiz <ruiz at kde.org> wrote:
>>> 2008/10/21 Ian Monroe <ian at monroe.nu>:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 4:13 AM, Seb Ruiz <ruiz at kde.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Max,
>>>>> I'd like to be able to give scripts access to insert or update tracks
>>>>> into the local sql collection database. My primary reason for doing
>>>>> this is to workaround numerous issues within QtScript combined with
>>>>> QtSql. Essentially, I'd like to be able to do something to the effect
>>>>> of sqlCollection()->insertTrack( url ); and add associated statistical
>>>>> data to that track (playcount, score etc).
>>>>>
>>>>> What is your opinion on exposing this sort of functionality? If you're
>>>>> okay with that, what would be the best implementation?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Seb
>>>>
>>>> I really can't imagine any other script ever needing to do this. So to me
>>>> that means either you should rethink having it be a script at all or it
>>>> means that you shouldn't worry about making the API clean, since its
>>>> essentially an internal API. So do whatever makes implementation easy.
>>>
>>> Sure, perhaps not, unless we want to allow third part scripts to build
>>> collections (bad idea perhaps). Eg, importers from arbitrary (iTunes,
>>> rythymbox collections etc)
>>
>> Actually I think enabling this is a very cool idea. :)
>>
>>> The QtScript bindings that we have don't expose the Meta objects to scripts.
>>
>> This isn't true. They are available via the playlist manipulation
>> stuff. You can even edit tags. Collections aren't really exposed at
>> all though.
>>
> Why aren't they then? Given that they are a core part of A2, it makes
> sense to allow scripts to work with collections, querymakers and meta
> objects imo. I'm not sure if any of those are scriptable yet, but are
> there technical reasons that prevent us from doing that (like Meta
> objects not being QObjects, or reference counting of meta objects)?
>
> Max

I've added script interfaces to non-QObjects, it's not hard at all.
But if you want to give scripters access to the Collections then it's
API does need to be safe and stable. So I guess we just need something
quick 'n' dirty to allow Seb to do his stuff and finalize an API post
2.0?

Bart