MPEM Development Info & Testversion (3 Viewers)

[sa_ddam213]

Just to confirm - do you mean no installation/access via web? Personally I have no problem with that since it saves me a lot of work LOL and since your MPEM concept offers everything an online repo does and looks even better imo! However, would that mean no access for 'visitors' to see what extensions MP offers before installing MPEM?

I mean MPEM will be the application that installs the plugin(Like MPEI does now) if users download the package from the Online repo and run it MPEM will start and install the plugin, that just mean that if your TVServer is a separate machine you will still use your MP machine to install TVServer plugins though a WCF connection.

The only reason I was leaning towards Wix was to allow installers to just be executed on and PC without needing to install another application first to handle the package.
The solution for plugins that require any PC install support we can add some sort of extract function to MPEM or they can continue to host the plugin on their own website.

Even if you can't download the plugins from the website due to versioning/dependency issue will should still have a read only gallery for browsing visitors etc.

Another question - how will MPEM deal with outdated extensions that are no longer supported? Will there be some mechanism to remove or archive those at some point? If an extension has not been updated for the past 2 years - should we even continue to list it

I think they should be removed is not updated for a certain period of time or even based of MP Version's, but not sure on what criteria should be applied to suggest a plugin is obsolete.[/quote]

 

[Edalex]

Another question - how will MPEM deal with outdated extensions that are no longer supported? Will there be some mechanism to remove or archive those at some point? If an extension has not been updated for the past 2 years - should we even continue to list it

I think they should be removed is not updated for a certain period of time or even based of MP Version's, but not sure on what criteria should be applied to suggest a plugin is obsolete.

Please don't forget that several users like me will stay i.e. on 1.3.0 so plugins compatible with previous versions should stay for a long long time.
BTW, one of my friends have just updated mp from 1.0.2 to 1.2.3. He was loosing stability with upgrading to new builds each time he tried upgrading. Even 1.3.0. is not enough stable for him

 

[Dadeo]

Yep I was thinking about that too Edalex, especially XP users who may stick with an older release for a while.
For sure we should never remove plugins that are still compatible - some don't have any dependencies or few that don't change.
The question in my mind is more how to archive old versions. If there is no support for extensions in old releases (even for MP 1.0.2 itself) it is pretty confusing to list those in MPEM imo - BUT there should be some way to still access them - maybe the online downloads repo? TBH I doubt you will even be able to use MPEM with old releases of MP so at best you would still use MPEI, and I don't know how long we can continue to support that! Sometimes the links in MPEI are no longer valid/accessible even for the original download.

 

[mm1352000]

Hello everyone

@sa_ddam213 I have a question for you: is the MPEM being designed in such a way that it can handle skins and logos?
If yes, can you point to any discussion about how will it work.
If no, could you please be so kind as to explain why not.

These questions come from this thread:
https://forum.team-mediaportal.com/...ng-skin-file-installation-for-plugins.121139/

Thanks!
mm

 

[sa_ddam213]

Hello everyone

@sa_ddam213 I have a question for you: is the MPEM being designed in such a way that it can handle skins and logos?
If yes, can you point to any discussion about how will it work.
If no, could you please be so kind as to explain why not.

These questions come from this thread:
https://forum.team-mediaportal.com/...ng-skin-file-installation-for-plugins.121139/

Thanks!
mm

Yes Skins and Logos are included, MPEM would be pretty much usless without them

How will it work, not sure I have had no real feedback or ideas from skin designers yet, but this thread is still open.

I am currently only working on the update service untill we can come to a decision on the install package type.

 

[mm1352000]

Thanks for the quick response!

Yes Skins and Logos are included, MPEM would be pretty much usless without them

I am definitely in support of MPEM handling them.

How will it work, not sure I have had no real feedback or ideas from skin designers yet, but this thread is still open.

Okay. I'm not sure if you were already aware of the other thread or if you were following the internal release process for MP 1.5 PR? Basically there has been some discussion about how to handle skin updates, whether skin files should be distributed in the skin or plugin packages etc. etc.
As the main MPEM developer/designer I hope you are aware that these conversations are happening and that they are giving some understanding of the complexity of the requirements for MPEM...

I am currently only working on the update service untill we can come to a decision on the install package type.

Yes, this install package type is critical for skins and logos in particular because I think they have more complex requirements than plugins.
For skins it may be desirable to have per-plugin [sub]packages (ie. distributions of only the files for a particular plugin + skin combination) and/or update packages in addition to full skin release packages.
For logos it may be desirable to have separate packages by style, location (regions/country), provider. At least it is not always desirable to download a huge package of logos if you're only interested in a small subset.

I'm not saying that I understand all or even any of the requirements for these things - far from it. Just looking to try and bring together people who are working on and/or talking about similar topics so that there is potential for co-operation.

 

[Edalex]

For logos it may be desirable to have separate packages by style, location (regions/country), provider. At least it is not always desirable to download a huge package of logos if you're only interested in a small subset.

Looks like you're not familiar with our LogoManager...

 

[mm1352000]

For logos it may be desirable to have separate packages by style, location (regions/country), provider. At least it is not always desirable to download a huge package of logos if you're only interested in a small subset.

Looks like you're not familiar with our LogoManager...

No, I'm not... but even if I was, I'd rather have an integrated solution.

 

[elliottmc]

For logos it may be desirable to have separate packages by style, location (regions/country), provider. At least it is not always desirable to download a huge package of logos if you're only interested in a small subset.

Looks like you're not familiar with our LogoManager...

No, I'm not... but even if I was, I'd rather have an integrated solution.

It is an integrated solution, and basically does what you want. Different styles, channel groups, countries.

I only just found out about it, and I love it!

I think the same approach could be used for installing skin files for plugins, where the skin files for non-installed plugins are not needed. It would be nice to find enough common ground to be able to all work together.

 

[mm1352000]

It is an integrated solution, and basically does what you want. Different styles, channel groups, countries.

I think we must have a different definition of "integrated". I'm talking about having one application/solution for logos, skins and plugins. In other words, having a plugin that only handles logos is not integrated by definition.