On 9 February 2010 22:38, Marius wrote: > on Monday 08 February 2010 22:20 Bart Cerneels wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 22:00, Seb Ruiz wrote: >> > Whilst I am not against the feature (I wrote it in 1.4), we did >> > explicitly remove the queue manager for Amarok 2.x. I can't remember >> > the exact reasoning, except that it was deemed overkill and >> > unnecessary in the face of culling features. >> > >> > Has there been any change in direction in this regard, and do the core >> > Amarok team regard the queue manager as a worthwhile and reasonable >> > feature to implement, regardless of who does the work? >> > >> > -- >> > Seb Ruiz >> >> Nope, I personally still think it's useless feature creep that will >> only increase the complexity of the  playlist. >> > > While I don't know about the previous discussion on the queue concept, I think in its current state amarok needs a queue manager. I guess we agree, that the user should be able to define which track or tracks are played next - be it because he personally likes them, or they are wishes by listeners (at a party), or whatever. If he is able to do that, he should be able to change that list of queued tracks. This is the extent of the functionality of the queue manager from Amarok 1.4 > > Furthermore he should be able to compose sets of tracks and easily play both > whole sets (random or ordered) and single tracks from a set in a defined order. I don't see any reason why we should support such a feature. This is introducing an increased complexity (which even I struggle to understand) to a feature which was always intended to be bare bones. The Amarok team was split over implementing queueing - so we settled on a simplistic implementation; we wanted to avoid the playlist within a playlist paradigm which can be so confusing. > > One way out of this is a queue manager. But additional thought brought me to a > new idea: if we had a way to use a non-random current playlist *and* still be > able to play saved playlists in random order, the need for queue concept would > be totally superseded. You could simply drag the tracks to be played next > behind the currently playing track. this is what the dynamic playlist is. > > For that we would need a dynamic playlist which plays tracks from a saved > playlist in either random or non-random order (*wah*, we have way to many > things called playlist :) ). Ideally, this dynamic playlist could easily be > "programmed" by rightclicking on an existing saved playlist and select > something like "play now". Much like in Amarok 1.4 - a dynamic playlist could be seeded by a smart playlist (with random ordering or what not) > > Additionally we have the problem, that the current playlist tends to become a > mess of random tracks, like the desktop of older windows distributions, which > makes navigating and ordering quite hard. That is because for anything you do > with saved playlists, you need to put tracks on the current playlist. You > can't drag tracks directly from the collection to a saved playist, but have to > go the indirection through the current playlist. It's also rather hard to drag > tracks from one playlist to another if you have many playlists or playlists > with many tracks. If you want to create a new saved playlist, you even have to > clear the current playlist, drag the desired tracks for the new saved playlist > on it and save it - that's obviously not possible while playing another set of > tracks. So the solution here isn't a queue manager, but rather to allow drops onto the playlist browser. > Summing up, amarok in its current state needs a queue manager. > If we polish the handling of saved playlists, the queue concept is rendered > useless. To achieve that, we need an easy way to access and navigate through > saved playlists and an easy to use dynamic playlist, which plays tracks from > saved playlists. I think this may be contradictory - you say that Amarok needs a queue manager, but then say that queues are redundant with better saved playlists. Maybe you have missed the *simplest* case for queueing, which is indeed why it exists: "There are many tracks in the playlist, which are played in random order. On the spur of the moment, I see or think of a track that I would like to hear next, and want to continue randomly afterwards." > A decent saved-playlists-browser would be cool, probably with the possibility > to open one or more playlists in a new window and drag tracks between them, > the current playlist and the collection. I doubt this would get implemented (see the topic on Feature Creep) -- Seb Ruiz http://www.sebruiz.net/ http://amarok.kde.org/ _______________________________________________ Amarok-devel mailing list Amarok-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/amarok-devel