Summer of Code: Draft of Playdar Proposal

[Leo Franchi]

On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Bart Cerneels <bart.cerneels at kde.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 14:40, Maximilian Kossick
> <maximilian.kossick at googlemail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Leo Franchi <lfranchi at kde.org> wrote:
>>> Hi Andy,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the comprehensive proposal!
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On the technical side I like to comment though:
>>>> You list a few custom GUI's required to use playdar in amarok. I
>>>> suggest you try to do without custom user interface elements for
>>>> playdar, except of course configuration, which will very likely be
>>>> required.
>>>
>>> I don't think I agree. I think a custom UI in the service browser is
>>> perfect---a nice delgate for track items that shows what resolver they
>>> are coming from, for example, as well as the track name/info. Just a
>>> thought.
>
> Yes, that is possible although probably a bit confusing for the end user.
>
> One good reason I'm trying to prevent adding more custom GUI's because
> those will prevent the integration being used in amarok mobile. This
> is true for many of the services, while the problem doesn't exist for
> collections.

I don't see how this is relevant.

a) If we use a delegate and M/V stuff we can just write a different or
standard view for Amarok Mobile, getting around the issue.
b) I strongly disagree with rejecting features from the desktop app
because of a potential perceived difficultly in a future mobile
application. We should  keep the mobile app in mind---but i don't
think that's a valid reason for rejecting a UI decision outright.

leo

-- 
_____________________________________________________________________
leonardo.franchi at tufts.edu         Tufts  University 2010
leo at kdab.com                                 KDAB (USA), LLC
lfranchi at kde.org                             The KDE Project