[vdr] Request: E parameter in channels.conf for epg scan

VDR User user.vdr at gmail.com
Sun Dec 19 13:28:18 CET 2010


On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 2:43 AM, Manuel Reimer <Manuel.Reimer at gmx.de> wrote:
>> You actually make an important point.  VDR was never designed with
>> server/client in mind.
>
> But there are plugins out there, that can add exactly what you need. One of them is "streamdev", which does a very good job.

I disagree about streamdev doing a 'very good job'.  That certainly
wasn't my experience when I tried it, though that was some time ago.
And even if you manage to get streamdev working, you still have other
issues which should be non-existent in a design where server/client
has been considered.

> Not anyone wants a client/server setup, so why should those people, not needing a networked setup, be forced to have all this stuff in their system, probably making things much slower.

There's not a single good reason a 'single instance' user would feel
any negative impact of VDR where it to contain real server/client
support.

> Another point is, that the more code you add to the core codebase, the more time is needed to keep things running and fix bugs...

I hope you're not suggesting that maintaining server/client code is
somehow tedious and time-consuming, especially in Linux.

>> Correct me if I'm
>> wrong but didn't he actually say at one point he _would_ revamp the
>> OSD system to something far more flexible and not so restricted and
>> simplistic?
>
> I like the OSD the way it is. It's one reason why I prefer VDR to other solutions. IMHO only a few changes are really needed in the OSD: Optional usage of true color for theme authors and a customizable main menu (Plain-Text configuration based on the class already used for commands.conf).

So you don't actually like the OSD the way it is.  In your own words
in the above quote you admit to wanting true color & customizable
menus/themes - two of the biggest user wishes in terms of OSD.  You
see the irony right?

> If I follow this discussion, then some people seem to not want to use VDR at all. If you don't like VDR, then maybe you want to have a look at other solutions. Maybe XBMC with its "tv-headend" or MythTV and if you want to use Windows, then please do so.

Don't mistake people wanting VDR to be more capable and provide more
user experience for them not liking or wanting to use VDR.  If that
were the case they probably wouldn't be on the VDR mailing list
talking about ways to improve it.  Also, I haven't noticed a single
comment from anyone expressing such a dislike and there's no reason
for you to take offense at the fact people want these things for VDR.
That we're even having this discussion contradicts your theory in the
first place.  A lot of people love VDR, myself being one of them, and
it's not a crime to see past where it was originally intended to be
when it was designed _over 10 years ago_.



More information about the vdr mailing list