home
products
contribute
download
documentation
forum
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
All posts
Latest activity
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
MediaPortal 1
Development
Improvement Suggestions
Scanning for new/updated channels results in a mess
Contact us
RSS
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="riksmith" data-source="post: 703725" data-attributes="member: 90854"><p>We are not sticking our head in the sand because we are open to making exceptions to the normal flow. But it is a very bad practice (in general programming) to base your NORMAL code on exceptional situations: in this case providers who like to invent there own rules. So if you can come up with a solution that does not affect users who have behaving providers, we are happy to look at it. But so far i have not seen one. </p><p></p><p>The reason i said that there is no such table is because there have been no modifications to the database for this change and the three id's are in tuningdetails as they have always been.</p><p></p><p>The channel has a unique id just as every object would have in a normal database. This has nothing to do with what is found on the network and what we are currently discussing. Basically (there are more fields but they are less important) a channel is just : id, name. </p><p></p><p>My source: DVB-C. Before: I would endup with losing 2 of the channels. It scanned 4 but i ended up with 2. (And i don't mean they were grouped or something, they were literally gone). And about the naming: I don't see a reason why we should call that stupid. </p><p></p><p>I hope i answered everything now that is in the last posts.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="riksmith, post: 703725, member: 90854"] We are not sticking our head in the sand because we are open to making exceptions to the normal flow. But it is a very bad practice (in general programming) to base your NORMAL code on exceptional situations: in this case providers who like to invent there own rules. So if you can come up with a solution that does not affect users who have behaving providers, we are happy to look at it. But so far i have not seen one. The reason i said that there is no such table is because there have been no modifications to the database for this change and the three id's are in tuningdetails as they have always been. The channel has a unique id just as every object would have in a normal database. This has nothing to do with what is found on the network and what we are currently discussing. Basically (there are more fields but they are less important) a channel is just : id, name. My source: DVB-C. Before: I would endup with losing 2 of the channels. It scanned 4 but i ended up with 2. (And i don't mean they were grouped or something, they were literally gone). And about the naming: I don't see a reason why we should call that stupid. I hope i answered everything now that is in the last posts. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
MediaPortal 1
Development
Improvement Suggestions
Scanning for new/updated channels results in a mess
Contact us
RSS
Top
Bottom