[Amarok] b0503f5 Move Playlists back into Meta.

[Jeff Mitchell]

On 03/28/2010 01:00 PM, Bart Cerneels wrote:
> Let me base this one similarities with Meta::Track.

The fact that you architected playlists around Meta's architecture
doesn't mean they belong in Meta.

> * They are also made available by a provider (ref. TrackProvider). It
> can be part of a Collection consisting of a TrackProvider,
> UserPlaylistProvider and QueryMaker.
> 
> * have different implementations (Sql, File, UMS),...

Like Collections or Plugins. They don't belong in Meta.

> * Playlist is a fundamental type in the sense of track being the
> fundamental type that has Album, Artist, Genre, ... as it's fields.
> Playlist has only has one complex type field: TrackList. All the rest
> are strings.

Again: so? (Also: if Playlist is a fundamental type, and Meta is a
fundamental type, this makes even more sense why they belong outside
Meta, instead of having fundamental types inside fundamental type.)

> * Playlist could be queried on in QueryMaker as a new QueryType. That
> way we can search for playlists that have tracks with certain albums,
> artists, Genre, rating, ... in them.

They can't, according to the bits of the conversation you just had with Max.

> I'm sure there are more arguments to be made, but the biggest one is
> more abstract:
> Playlists should not be treated as a second class citizen in Amarok by
> keeping them out of the true hard of amarok's core: Meta and
> Collection. It's as much a technical issue: Playlists not supported by
> QueryMaker; as a social one: new collection implementations (MD)
> lacking a decent PlaylistProvider.

Stop making baseless assumptions. I've never thought of Playlists as a
"second class citizen" no matter how many times you have made that
claim. Nor do I know of anyone else feeling this way except for you.

Maybe instead of saying that the true hearts of Amarok's core are Meta
and Collection, you should be making statements that the true hearts of
Amarok's core are Meta, Collection, and Playlists.

In fact, the evidence is against you: in core/ you find not only meta
and collections, but also playlists, plugins, podcasts, statistics, and
more.

> Even though 2.3 has gotten some excellent comments there are still
> very vocal, flat out hostile rejections that are hard to ignore: there
> is no decent playlists synchronization and some implementations are
> flat out missing.

And this has what to do with Playlist being in Meta? (NOTHING.)

> Not surprising as there is only one time strapped developer working on
> this. Since Jeff has already reverted this I'm sure people are not
> interested in improving this though.

There's only one time strapped developer working on most of the
different parts of Amarok.

--Jeff

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/amarok-devel/attachments/20100328/d81dff9c/attachment-0001.sig