ATF: Stop spreading FUD about other media players

[Jeff Mitchell]

On Friday 21 July 2006 08:13, Gábor Lehel wrote:
> Jeff, not wanting to sound like one myself, but you're coming off here
> as just as much of a prick as he is. (The world would be truly a
> better place if people didn't take every opportunity they get to be
> offended and defensive, whenever they find something suitable for
> misinterpretation).

Okay, sorry.  I admit that.  When someone publicly calls me a liar and a fraud 
and belittles the work I've done, I tend to want to publicly call them a 
moron (if I feel that that is the case and that I have the proof that they 
are incorrect).

> The amarok wiki isn't loading at the moment, and Google doesn't have a
> cache of it, so I don't know what exactly it says beyond the quotes
> provided.

What he objects to is an addition I made to the Wiki adding a few more media 
players to the list of players that do not use unique identifiers in metadata 
to help them do things.  The addition included Quod Libet and LSongs.  AFAIK 
I'm still correct.  Qoud Libet stores statistics information, but as best as 
I can tell it doesn't use unique identifiers for tracking files and 
statistics, which is all ATF claims to do (for now).  The wiki page did say 
that other media players would lost statistics as you moved files around, 
however I have since updated it to say "possibly,"  since players that will 
lost statistics are those that use databases, and Quod Libet is the exception 
there.

> But here's my read of the situation:
>
> - Quod Libet developer misinterprets "Advanced Tag Features" (tracking
> of files) as "Advanced Tagging Features" (basically, everything else).

I think that was only part of it.  He understood the part about tracking 
files, but got offended that it also talked about tracking statistics, which 
QL does.  At this point he seemed to be well aware of what ATF was about.

It's in his third point that he takes the opportunity to slam Amarok's tagging 
features and hype his own.  Personally I think he understood what it was 
about, but simply wanted to be as insulting as possible.

> - Quod Libet developer is insulted by the statement that Quod LIbet
> does not have this.

Fixed in the language in the Wiki.  Although the Wiki was never technically 
wrong, since QL doesn't use unique identifiers to track statistics, the 
language has been updated to reflect the fact that not all players lose 
statistics as you move them around.

> - Quod Libet developer is confused that the proposal doesn't actually
> have much to do with advanced tagging features. (This apparent
> contradiction would have been a good opportunity to step back for a
> moment and realize the mistake).
>
> - Quod Libet developer writes angry email.
>
> - Amarok (and ATF) developer reads angry email.
>
> - Amarok developer does not realize this is a developer of Quod Libet,
> not just a random internet fanatic. (At least, from the email, this is
> not apparent).

Not quite true.  Judging from his email address (at the same domain as the 
lists) and his quoting of QL source code, I figured he was a QL developer.  
That makes his email even more inexcusable, since as a developer and someone 
familiar with metadata tags in audio files (which he is, if you see his [0] 
footnote) he should have easily been able to answer the majority of his 
questions by simply reading the Wiki page instead of immediately taking 
offense, writing a ranting, flaming email, and CCing the quod-libet mailing 
list.

> - Amarok developer is insulted by the statement that he intentionally lied.

Yes, among other claims that he made.  My first inclination upon reading ranty 
emails is not to insult the party that sent it, but he went out of his way to 
attack me and my work.

> - Amarok developer realizes the misunderstanding of the other party,
> but does not connect the dots. (This would have been a good
> opportunity to connect the dots).

I'm not sure what dots there were to connect.  The only thing I can gather 
from his email is that he didn't actually read the Wiki page with any sort of 
care before writing his email.  Instead of emailing and saying "Hey, guys, 
Quod Libet keeps track of your statistics information" he went into attack 
mode.  The first would have garnered an immediate, pleasant response.  The 
second just pisses everyone off.

> - Amarok developer writes angry response.

I did not send that response to him, although he's welcome to read it, and 
this thread, on this mailing list.



--Jeff