Amarok 1.4 collection and artwork importing

[Jeff Mitchell]

Pedro de Carvalho Gomes wrote:
>> I honestly don't understand why you won't listen to the actual facts
>> being told to you by the main Amarok developer working on the SQL
>> collection -- specifically the scanning and database schema and
>> insertion parts of it.
> 
> What you've told me was that files SHOULD be rescanned

No, I said MUST.

> I  ask
> the feasibility to use the URLs from a query to the the A1 database as
> input to the collection scanner, as an alternative to the directories
> selected at the treeview. I've stated to rescan each file, NOT to
> REUSE any A1 data at all. Those are distinct things.

That was very confusingly put the first time:

"I think that the valid Urls returned from the SQL query
could be used as the input of the rescan, as an alternative to the
directories chosen at the "Collection Folders" treeview. This way the
import Tool would mark the collection folders."

Mainly because of the last sentence there. Regardless, the
collectionscanner does not currently allow this. Theoretically it could
be changed to do so, but I prefer to leave it alone -- right now it
works quite stably and rearchitecting both it and the scan result
processor to accept files instead of directories isn't something that
seems worth it for the very few numbers of users it would help,
especially when a simple full rescan fixes the problem anyways. I'm much
more interested in improving scanning performance for all users, which
has been a focus of mine recently.

> I really do want to be constructive. I've been very clear about this
> since my first to my last e-mails.

No, they have not been very clear.

> And all my messages have been quiet
> polite and well-toned.

No, they haven't.

> I've presented at least three different
> situations at them (the partial import bug

It's not a partial import bug, because there's no real import happening.

> , my "idiot" suggestion and

I like that you put the quotes around "idiot", as if to imply that I
called you one. Which I haven't.

> the misleading button name).

And multiple times I've suggested or agreed with ways that this
misleading could be remedied.

> But you've chosen to mock my first
> e-mail,

No, I didn't mock your first e-mail.

> and then to attack me because of the suggestion on the other
> ones

You say "attack", I say "present the facts in an increasingly frustrated
manner".

> , instead of looking at the big picture.

Lulz.

> Anyway, let's try to start over again: I'm new to Amarok code, I've
> found a case that causes a bug, and I'd like to help to solve it.
> Would you, or anyone one else, help me to fix this?

I have already detailed in a very specific fashion exactly how you could
go about fixing this. Instead of following up on this, you ignored it
entirely.

--Jeff

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/amarok/attachments/20091029/490bc3ed/attachment.sig>