[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       amarok-devel
Subject:    Re: Queuing - final call
From:       "Bart Cerneels" <bart.cerneels () gmail ! com>
Date:       2008-12-19 20:11:09
Message-ID: dd7ac1430812191211pf419255gad589dc73c6a2707 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 8:51 PM, Leo Franchi <lfranchi@kde.org> wrote:
>
> On 19 Dec 2008, at 13:11, Bart Cerneels wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 3:42 PM, Leo Franchi <lfranchi@kde.org> wrote:
>>> On 19 Dec 2008, at 08:34, Dan Meltzer wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 8:20 AM, Lydia Pintscher <lydia@kde.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 2:07 PM, Seb Ruiz <ruiz@kde.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Squad,
>>>>>> I'd like to get a final decision on what we do about queuing.
>>>>>> Options are:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A) My implementation, which is a direct clone of 1.4 functionality
>>>>>> (although a little simpler atm)
>>>>>> or;
>>>>>> B) Bart's implementation which is quite a bit different, yet very
>>>>>> interesting. Please read his mail.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just a simple +1 A/B will do, no need to start discussing the
>>>>>> topic
>>>>>> again. Please refrain from putting in your personal use cases
>>>>>> here, or
>>>>>> letting them make up your mind. Decide based on what you think
>>>>>> will be
>>>>>> the most useful as a whole to the application and the community.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'll start.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A +1
>>>> A++;
>>>
>>> A+1
>>>
>>> Bart's implementation currently doesn't work if you have random mode
>>> turned on. This seems to be like a pretty big loss of functionality
>>> from 1.x.
>>>
>> Random mode won't be the same in a queue, since the queue determines
>> the play order. So random mode would shuffle the upcoming tracks,
>> either when starting playback, at user request or at the end of every
>> track.
>>
>> The nice thing we gain is that the play history is maintained and
>> visible in the queue without an additional UI. So if the user was
>> happy with the random selection over the past hour or so he can save
>> to be replayed later.
>
> Shuffle != Random
>
> If I am listening to a bunch of albums, and I want to suddenly listen
> to one song next, i could queue it up in 1.x. Now, this would be
> impossible with the first version, and with what you just said, it
> would result in shuffling the *whole* playlist (losing the pretty
> album ordering, so making the playlist explode) and me losing my
> arrangement just because i want to hear a certain track next?
>
> leo
PlaylistView != QueueView

I realize that the pretty album ordering looks good, but is that is
the only thing against a QueueView? This is only an issue in random
mode though. I don't think the look should prevent a logical, easy to
understand UI.
_______________________________________________
Amarok-devel mailing list
Amarok-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/amarok-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]