Music Player - Needs

Olivier Churlaud olivier at churlaud.com
Sat Aug 8 16:50:51 BST 2015


I think there is no further discussion.. Maybe check the forum (*)

  * https://forum.kde.org/viewtopic.php?f=285&t=122273&

Le 08/08/2015 16:37, RISHABH GUPTA a écrit :
> hello,
>
> Is the discussion taking place on   some other mailing list ?
>
> thanks,
> rishabh
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 7:32 PM, Ing. Konrad Renner 
> <konrad.renner at kolabnow.com <mailto:konrad.renner at kolabnow.com>> wrote:
>
>     That sounds like good plan ;-)
>
>     Am 05.08.2015 3:43 nachm. schrieb Andrew Lake
>     <jamboarder at gmail.com <mailto:jamboarder at gmail.com>>:
>     >
>     > Good points Teo. I don't think a decision has yet been made, or
>     even a strong bias towards to starting from scratch. In fact I
>     think the bias is toward reusing/building on existing code. What
>     is not yet clear is *which* code base to use in light of the goals
>     of the music player. Having worked on Bangrang, I'd be sincerely
>     and entirely happy if the collective decision is to take advantage
>     of Amarok's code base, or Juk or anything else. What matters is
>     that we ensure that whatever it is built upon is sustainable for
>     the folks involved.
>     >
>     > I'd offer that we probably have enough to go ahead and start
>     refining the vision of what this music player is supposed to be,
>     flesh out any lingering questions about intended functions, then
>     with that done, continue a more detailed discussion about which
>     existing codebase, if any, would best serve those needs.
>     >
>     > Hope this helps,
>     > Andrew
>     >
>     >
>     > On Wed, Aug 5, 2015, 4:13 AM Teo Mrnjavac <teo at kde.org
>     <mailto:teo at kde.org>> wrote:
>     >>
>     >> On Wednesday, August 05, 2015 12:06:18 Olivier Churlaud wrote:
>     >> > Hi,
>     >> >
>     >> > I read all the ideas that came up on this mailing list. I
>     just want to
>     >> > sum up what I found interesting and the question that it
>     raised for me.
>     >> > I don't explain or say that what I mean is true, but if I
>     have this
>     >> > questions, maybe some other have it..
>     >> >
>     >> > *Local library - Amarok ?*
>     >> > As Myriam  said, Amarok is not dead and is slowly beeing
>     ported to KF5.
>     >> > Amarok was one of the huge assets of KDE and is quite good.
>     IMOH it
>     >> > lacks the possibility to create playlists (but this might be
>     corrected
>     >> > by contributing to the project) and the support of network
>     library. I
>     >> > think that if we want to create a music player that plays the
>     local
>     >> > library, we'll be in conflict with an awesome software, which
>     might need
>     >> > a refresh but this can be done by people interested in
>     Amarok. (And then
>     >> > of course all the Clementine, Rhythmbox.... are already
>     present and
>     >> > quite good).
>     >> >
>     >>
>     >> This is exactly what I suggested at the beginning of that
>     thread. To put it
>     >> plainly, Amarok has some issues. For instance, I strongly
>     dislike Amarok's UI,
>     >> even though I'm partly responsible for it. However, there are
>     many hard
>     >> problems that Amarok developers solved very well, after many
>     years of learning
>     >> and work.
>     >>
>     >> I don't fancy myself a veteran, as there are people who have
>     been doing music
>     >> players for much longer, but I do have some years of
>     craftsmanship on Amarok
>     >> and Tomahawk under my belt, and with those bits of experience
>     I'm a bit
>     >> surprised that some developers seem so happy to rush into a
>     full rewrite.
>     >>
>     >> *Good* collection management is hard. *Good* metadata
>     management is really
>     >> hard. Backends have their quirks. Then you need at least some
>     web services,
>     >> for metadata and covers as a minimum, because you can't
>     realistically have a
>     >> modern music player by just whipping the llama's ass like it's
>     1997. And all
>     >> of that is just the minimum viable functionality to get
>     started, before even
>     >> thinking of delivering a product that adds some extra value on
>     top of what the
>     >> competition does.
>     >>
>     >> Don't want to work on an old codebase? Fine, that's a reason
>     for starting from
>     >> scratch. It's important to have fun when you're a volunteer,
>     and old code is
>     >> often not fun at all. I understand and support that. I like fun.
>     >>
>     >> Don't feel like adapting to years of Amarok team practices and
>     lore? That's
>     >> another reason for starting from scratch. Creative control is
>     fun, and an
>     >> added bonus if you're a volunteer. Sometimes starting anew is
>     the best way to
>     >> get traction. I understand that too.
>     >>
>     >> I'd be happy to see any work being done on awesome music
>     players, even a new
>     >> one from scratch. But even with knowledge of the Amarok
>     codebase and the
>     >> dragons that lie within I find it really hard to believe that
>     building on
>     >> Amarok's strengths and throwing away the bad stuff could be
>     technically harder
>     >> than starting from scratch.
>     >>
>     >> For me in a perfect world this would be a discussion on how to
>     >> reboot/refresh/rebrand Amarok (or Bangarang, JuK, Clementine,
>     ...). It's
>     >> completely fine if the reasons for starting anew aren't
>     technical, but at the
>     >> very least, while preserving the fun, novelty and creative
>     control of starting
>     >> from scratch, I suggest the new developers take a look at what
>     Amarok is doing
>     >> with collections and metadata.
>     >>
>     >> "We want to start from scratch for maximum creative control and
>     fun" is a good
>     >> rationale. Go for it. We need this kind of get-things-done
>     approach in KDE.
>     >>
>     >> "We want to start from scratch because it's technically
>     impossible to build on
>     >> top of Amarok" makes no sense to me.
>     >>
>     >> Cheers,
>     >> --
>     >> Teo Mrnjavac
>     >> http://teom.org | teo at kde.org <mailto:teo at kde.org>
>     >> _______________________________________________
>     >> kde-multimedia mailing list
>     >> kde-multimedia at kde.org <mailto:kde-multimedia at kde.org>
>     >> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-multimedia
>     _______________________________________________
>     kde-multimedia mailing list
>     kde-multimedia at kde.org <mailto:kde-multimedia at kde.org>
>     https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-multimedia
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> kde-multimedia mailing list
> kde-multimedia at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-multimedia

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-multimedia/attachments/20150808/c9d16aa1/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
kde-multimedia mailing list
kde-multimedia at kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-multimedia


More information about the kde-multimedia mailing list