JuK -> KDE CVS

[Charles Samuels]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Saturday 01 March 2003 3:04, Scott Wheeler wrote:
> On Friday 28 February 2003 19:31, Charles Samuels wrote:
> > Wouldn't it make more sense to make it a noatun plugin?
>
> Possibly.  As I'm sure you recall I was the first one who pondered the
> possibility of this in our conversation a few weeks back on IRC.  We agreed
> that Noatun's plugin API currently can't do what JuK needs and that you
> might be willing to change this in the future.  (more later in the email)
>
> > Then you'd get effects, equalizer, visualization, and various plugins for
> > free.
>
> Well, in their current state these aren't useful in JuK.  I need these to
> be available as ordinary widgets that can be "plugged in" to the playlist
> GUI. As far as I know this isn't currently possible.
I don't think anyone would complain if a visualization or other plugins were 
floating windows.  I've long been considering making plugins register their 
QWidget *.  Best example of why this would be useful is how a plugin (Young 
Hickory) could traverse that list easily.

Secondly, the effects and equalizer API would let you implement your own GUI 
for the same data as now.  For the equalizer and visualization class, this 
would be the best way to handle it.

>
> And there is the issue that most people simply don't care, but well, that's
> not terribly important.
>
> > And we could implement plugin-profiles in noatun, create a [Kicker
> > K-Menu] item just for JuK.
>
> Nice idea.  Again, I don't think this is currently possible.
Minimal work, and I've been wanting it for a while as, let's face it, 
Excellent isn't exactly the prettiest thing in the planet, and some lusers 
expect every app to be uniform except the music player.

I don't make the rules :)

>
> > All of this while having the exact same UI.
>
> Again, not currently possible.  When it is, as I've said before, I'm open
> to this possibility.

Well, the profiles thing isn't possible (well, maybe if you have some dcop 
trickery...)

Making it possible to load up JuK is possible with some trickery -- I'm not 
condoning that, I'm willing to improve noatun for this.

>
> Now for some history:
>
> First people have asked why JuK wasn't a Noatun plugin originally --
> several reasons -- JuK (then QTagger) and Noatun were started at about the
> same time. Their first releases were about 2 months apart.
>
> Then, when I started the port to KDE 3 (from pure Qt 2) there was constant
> discussion on the lists and IRC about the plugin API in Noatun changing and
> breaking the plugins, and you not fixing the plugins, but just disabling
> them from compilation.  (I remember discussions specifically with you, Rik
> and Neil.)  A year later I don't think all of the issues around those
> plugins have been resolved and they're still not used.  This was and is
> hardly encouraging for a would be Notuan plugin developer.  Surely you can
> understand this being somewhat discouraging.

I felt the API needed changing.  I'm sticking to the current one.  I'm 
thinking of changing it again for kde4, but they will be far less invasive.

>
> The other option, as you suggest, would be to make JuK a Noatun playlist.
> What I suggest here is a hybrid.  I'm not convinced that this will work as
> a solution to the jukbox problem, but I'm willing to entertain the
> possibility. In the near-ish future, I would suggest having JuK build both
> a Noatun plugin and a standalone app.  This will provide a test case to see
Sounds reasonable

> how well completely moving in that direction would be possible.  This is
> also something that I've suggested to you and others in the past, so again,
> nothing new here.  And believe it or not, in some of my recent source code
> restructuring, I've tried to decouple the components in JuK in such a way
> that this could be easier.

>
> I would suggest working on both of these since they're not mutually
> exclusive. I'm still not sure that Noatun's plugin API can be mangled into
> something useful for JuK in the short term (in a BC way), but that's your
> territory and I'll leave that to you.

Well, as I've said, I'm confident that it could be done in a BC way... but 
take it with a grain of salt -- I'm only the one who wrote all this code ;)


- -- 
Charles Samuels <charles at kde.org>
"Pacifism implies quite a bit of wisdom" -- Maksim Orlovich
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+YNyqWS4Pv66UcxkRAjlIAKDmqO+lAgT7FDKFNcUpjHBFc/zRtACeMvSb
BTCQ7aV1DUA17aFMzOfBOmg=
=EUxB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----