Felipe, Allow me to reply starting from one of your last your statements: On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 03:46 +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote: > We are now in June and I haven't heard anything. This is just not true. To your inquire back in April, this is what I replied: https://garage.maemo.org/pipermail/mafw-lastfm-devel/2010-April/000077.html I thought you'd follow up with what I commented as the two main reasons why I didn't consider libscrobble at that point yet, but since you didn't I just continued fixing issues in my code as time allowed. > > 1) Support for multi-scrobbling (both last.fm and libre.fm at the same time) > Includes a song queue per service. I haven't worked on this yet, because I was fixing other issues that were more important. I list them below, even when I am sure that you know already. > 2) Improved song queue handling > Since internally it uses libscrobble (which is independent of MAFW), > the important code can be easily tested on desktop sw, and it has > been done so… throughly. > It doesn’t matter how flaky your network is, or that the servers are > down, the songs will be submitted. I have fixed all the issues with the network handling for at least a month now (these were released in 0.0.5). I also implemented support for scrobbling behind proxies[1], which is in a branch in gitorious waiting to get some testing from users. > 3) Permanent storage > The song queue is not lost, even on crashes, device reboots, or > software updates. I have also implemented permanent storage during last week and it's working fine. I am planning to do a release including this during this week, but I was waiting for some translations to come in first [2]. > 4) Video clips are ignored > Small feature, but important. In the same email I link above, I replied to you that I wasn't against implementing this if there was broader interest from users. Since I didn't get much more feedback on this regard it was low in my priorities. > [...] > Then I brought up all the problems to the mailing list [1], and I tried to > contribute to mafw-lastfm [2], some trivial patches got in, but the > important ones [3] did not. That was back in February, and at that > point Claudio (the maintainer) decided to wait until a stable release > (0.0.4), which was done in April. We are now in June and I haven't heard > anything. Well, as I said already, I told you clearly what were my concerns regarding libscrobble. Instead of following up on the discussion, you preferred to go your own way and implement yet another scrobbler. Good on you. > So I decided to implement the missing pieces and provide what IMO is > supperior software (at the very least it does what I need, and hopefully > you would like it too). I don't how to take this. Unfortunately, I was waiting for your feedback on my comments. I apologize if you were expecting something different. I don't know if it was necessary for you to go your own way and implement your own scrobbler, but in the end it's up to you. In a normal case I'd be glad to see alternative software, because competition is healthy, but in this case I find it a bit ridiculous – it's such a small software that it barely makes sense to offer people two different ones that in the end will obviously do the same. But that's your way, and you're free to do it. Claudio [1] https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9966 [2] https://garage.maemo.org/pipermail/mafw-lastfm-devel/2010-June/000106.html _______________________________________________ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@xxxxxxxxx https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
