16 replies to this topic

[Huevos]

Couldn't there be a third option?

 

1) Load unlinked.

2) Rename unlinked (.del)

3) Don't load and don't rename.

 

http://sourceforge.n...9db1a4f8b15562/

[littlesat]

Why?

Edited by littlesat, 31 January 2015 - 22:13.

[Huevos]

Why?

Like I said before these changes break bouquets creation plugins. I had to fix AutoBouquetsMaker to take account of the earlier changes,  And "AB 28.2" (UKCVS plugin) is still broken in PLi because of these changes. At least with the third option there would be backwards compatibility.

Edited by Huevos, 31 January 2015 - 22:45.

[littlesat]

PI suggest those plugins should adapt.

And in fact completely adapt as acutally they should not hack into the settings... In fact they should be made like cablescan and fastscan is made.

But why and how it breaks these plugins? It is just a rename of a bouquet that isn't there or it loads a bouquet that was not linked....

Edited by littlesat, 31 January 2015 - 22:58.

[Huevos]

PI suggest those plugins should adapt.

That would require a hack in the plugin so it works one way in PLi and another way in all other images.

 

It means the plugin can't leave a bouquet out of the index and reinstate it at a later date because PLi has renamed it.

[Abu Baniaz]

If default was to not load non-indexed bouquets, there would be no issue.

[littlesat]

When it is in bouquets.tv or bouquets.radio it wil never rename it when you perform a reloadbouquets so I really do not understand the issue here? Why should you add stuff later?
Why can't these plugins not just hide the bouquets it loaded instead of not linking it (I can only imagine this is happening).

Note that hacky plugins should be solved... And not the image...

But first I need to understand the mechanism what might go wrong....

Edited by littlesat, 31 January 2015 - 23:32.

[Huevos]

Because that is what the user directs it to do.

 

The way I see it OpenPLi is loading/renaming files that it is not the owner of. And without the option for a user to be able to disable that behaviour.

 

The bouquet creator plugins don't do this. They only work on files they have created themselves and respect bouquets created by other means.

Edited by Huevos, 31 January 2015 - 23:37.

[Huevos]

P [...]And in fact completely adapt as acutally they should not hack into the settings... In fact they should be made like cablescan and fastscan is made.

Not sure what hack you are talking about. ABM works exactly the same as Fastscan, except it is compatible with a much wider range of providers.

[Abu Baniaz]

AB 28.2 worked flawlessly until this commit

http://sourceforge.n....sage/32623539/

 

That is more than two yeasrs of a "hacky" plugin working fine. After that change to OPenPLI, the two bouquets that the plugin does not index have been automatically added to top of the list. The two bouquets which AB 28.2 routinely omits are the Adult and Gaming ones. You can imagine that some people would not be too happy that the upper most bouquet is Porn.

[littlesat]

Abm does not work like fast and cable scan.... It is a big work a round...

But i still do not understand why abm needs and creates unlinked bouquets?

Basically you do not want unlinked bouquets at all...... They are muda and in fact they should be deleted right away.

When you make a plugin that loads more bouquets and you want to enable oe disable parts you should hide, show them or not kept an unlinked bouquets...

But I start to thing that some do not understand this at all...

Edited by littlesat, 31 January 2015 - 23:49.

[Huevos]

The reason for keeping unlinked bouquets is that the plugin is not the owner or the creator of those bouquets so should not be renaming them. The plugin has the option to display or not to display.

 

And like Abu says, if you tell the UKCVS plugin not to display the porn bouquet, OpenPLi does it instead and places it right at the top.

[littlesat]

Pli does not show hiden bouquets on top.... Unlinked bouquets yep, they are on top or will get the .del now...
These plugins should just add 512 to the flag and keep it linked.... And this will work in openpli and also in other oe-a images...

Please note in openpli you can also assign parental control on bouquets... You do not really need to hide those... And this is build in standardwise...

Edited by littlesat, 1 February 2015 - 00:11.

[littlesat]

please note that the issue of the first bouquet could not be really hidden bug was solved preveous last week,.,.

[Huevos]

please note that the issue of the first bouquet could not be really hidden bug was solved preveous last week,.,.

Yes, I know and am grateful it has been fixed. ABM does use 512 flag but that was problematic before the first bouquet bug was fixed.

 

But even if you use 512 flag the channels are still accessible by number. Just hidden from the bouquet list.

 

So, in the case of the UKCVS plugin that is not the perfect option when trying to leave the porn bouquet out of the index.

Edited by Huevos, 1 February 2015 - 00:27.

[Huevos]

Yes,[...] So, in the case of the UKCVS plugin that is not the perfect option when trying to leave the porn bouquet out of the index.

TBH, not sure why UKCVS plugin creates a bouquet at all if the user has said no.

Edited by Huevos, 1 February 2015 - 00:41.

[littlesat]

You have to put à parental lock om that userbouquet that is possible in openpli.