MP recording or 4TR: pros and cons? (1 Viewer)

[doornjoostje]

+1 for 4TR MP integration!

 

[Bussiebaer]

For now, I like it the way it is. It's easier and faster for me to update 4TR to a new version, as to update the whole MP. But that is just me

 

[dvdfreak]

For The Record is built on a service-oriented architecture, so MediaPortal integration actually comes naturally to it.

All that would be needed is to continue to improve the recorder/tuner part to integrate even closer with TV server (e.g., have it support teletext, handle DVB-EPG in a better way,...) and improve the GUI client further (it's already close to what the standard TV plugin does, but there's more that can be added...).

It's exactly these two parts that are fully open source, so what are you all waiting for

 

[kkendall]

Ok, so it would be easy to integrate 4TR into MP as the standard recording section as I understand you right now.
In other words: To make the 4TR plugin the standard recording section of the standard MP installation in the future, should be an easy job.

But are you also saying the recorder/tuner part is not yet where it should be, compared to the standard TVserver recorder/tuner part? I see you mention some things like teletext and epg handling that are not supported by 4TR, do I understand correctly? My initial post was to find those things out, those kinds of pros and cons.

And what am I waiting for? For the devs to respond to see what they have to say about 4TR integration!

 

[dvdfreak]

Ok, so it would be easy to integrate 4TR into MP as the standard recording section as I understand you right now.
In other words: To make the 4TR plugin the standard recording section of the standard MP installation in the future, should be an easy job.

For The Record as a whole is not really a plugin.

It's a core solution that manages your TV guide, allows you to schedule programs, manages conflicts&priorities, uses a recorder/tuner (TV server) to record these programs, keeps a library of what has been recorded, cleans up that library in case of low disk-space,...

Developed around this core there is a Management Console for power-user access, Web Access for local/remote access with a browser, a MediaPortal GUI plugin for lazy-seat-in-your-livingroom access, an IM-bot for instant messaging access (yes, you can chat with your server ),...

The whole thing goes way beyond just being "a better scheduler".

But are you also saying the recorder/tuner part is not yet where it should be, compared to the standard TVserver recorder/tuner part? I see you mention some things like teletext and epg handling that are not supported by 4TR, do I understand correctly? My initial post was to find those things out, those kinds of pros and cons.

DVB-EPG works fine right now, but could be done in a "nicer way", purely from a technical point of view.

Teletext is not supported yet, something we'll be adding in a future version.

And what am I waiting for? For the devs to respond to see what they have to say about 4TR integration!

All is quiet on the western front...

 

[kkendall]

Man, as I learn more and more about 4TR and start to understand it better, it keeps gets better and better!

I see you also have this developed for other HTPC software. Cool
Do you have a 'know issues' or a 'to do' list?

Before I go home and try this out, just a question about the fonts. I've changed the fonts for the epg and corrected the stretched logos so it would look better on my tv.
Does 4TR use all the same xml files that MP does with just some added extra xml files or do you overwrite some xml files to add your functions? Because then I have to edit again...
So are the main tv screen, epg, etc the standard xml files or yours?

 

[dvdfreak]

For The Record has six custom skin files, all other XML files of MediaPortal are re-used. So you may have to take a look at those six files I'm afraid. The good news is that the TV guide is not among these six files, so your modifications to that will stick.

 

[infinite.loop]

kkendall
We have no problem with constructive criticism.
But you should realy tone your voice down in here. Some of your posts are close to be considered as flaming.

Let me answer your questions now:

• Q: "It's not even in the Hot Plugin section"
• A: Take a look at the TV-Server Forums. There is no "Hot Plugins" section simply because there are so few plugins that this was not required, nor request by DVDFreak.

• Q: "What is it that the devs have against 4TR?"
• A: Nothing. Why should we have soething against a community plugin which extends our application?

• Q: "Why is it not part of the TV-Server?"
• A: At the time it was developed and the first request for an integration came up, we were working on 1.0.
  We did talk about an integration, one of our developers and myselfe were in contact with DVDfreak.
  
  But we came to the conclusion, that swaping the entire schedule and recording logic would have been insane at this point.
  Especially with the version available back then.
  dvd freak decided to reworked his application and renamed it to 4TR during the next months.
  
  Also DVDFreak did not contact us regarding an integration since MP left the featurefreeze state with the 1.0 release.

So could we intergate 4TR during the next months?
Yes, in theory we can.
But everyone has to be aware of a few things.

1. DVDFreak must release the entire sourcecode under GPL (which only happend for the plugin yet as far as i know). Last time we talked, he was concerned that someone could "steal" his logic and use it without his permission. Thats why he decided to keep the sources closed. I do not know what he thinks about this now.
2. We have to check if the current code even fits into the TV-Server, and evaluate how much rework on both parts is required.
   It's not copy/paste code and files to get everything working.
3. We have to ensure that those users which are happy with the simple recording and schedule features TV-Server offers, do not get forced to use something more powerful but more complex.
4. The development speed of 4TR will decrease a lot once it is a part of the TV-Server. Because when we put TV-Server/MediaPortal in feature freeze, then this could last months where no new feature is allowed.
   If you look at the featurefreeze period which was required to get MediaPortal 1.0 release done, then you can imagine what this would have ment for 4TR.
   This is the reason why some developers even prefer to stay a communityplugin.

 

[dvdfreak]

[*]The development speed of 4TR will decrease a lot, because when we put TV-Server/MediaPortal in feature freeze, then this could last months where no new feature is allowed.

This must be a typo, because I'm reading this like you just wrote the For The Record development speed will decrease. So unless you know something even I don't know I guess you meant to type something else.

EDIT: OK, I understand what you meant by this now, sorry, wasn't quite clear

 

[infinite.loop]

[*]The development speed of 4TR will decrease a lot, because when we put TV-Server/MediaPortal in feature freeze, then this could last months where no new feature is allowed.

This must be a typo, because I'm reading this like you just wrote the For The Record development speed will decrease. So unless you know something even I don't know I guess you meant to type something else.

EDIT: OK, I understand what you meant by this now, sorry, wasn't quite clear

I have edited my post to make it more clear (really was missleading a bit )

The development speed of 4TR will decrease a lot once it is a part of the TV-Server. Because when we put TV-Server/MediaPortal in feature freeze, then this could last months where no new feature is allowed.
If you look at the featurefreeze period which was required to get MediaPortal 1.0 release done, then you can imagine what this would have ment for 4TR.
This is the reason why some developers even prefer to stay a communityplugin.