[vdr] Client/server implementation after VDR 2.0: Do [not] reinvent the wheel
geronimo013 at gmx.de
Thu Mar 1 15:31:40 CET 2012
On Thursday 01 March 2012 - 10:31:37, Paul Menzel wrote:
> On Thursday 01 March 2012 - 07:03:03, VDR User wrote:
> I just want to throw in, that there are several programs already using a
> client/server approach (MythTV , Tvheadend , …) and we should not
> reinvent the wheel when designing the new implementation.
I'd like to oppose headline and last statement.
"We" can do better, so let's go ahead :)
I don't know MythTV, but I tried tvheadend. It has a really attractive
backend, but no (working) frontend. Starting vlc from browser crashes the
browser and the frontend does not connect to backend at all.
With available docs from programs website there's no way to get a working C/S
solution (refering to debian stable).
So from a users point of view, I prefer a working solution with "suboptimal"
design over an attractive design, that does not work.
>> If Klaus is clear about what he wants and is in good communication with
>> other coders, perhaps it could become more of a team effort with Klaus as
>> team captain..
>> Keep in mind, people have been wishing for VDR to go this route for quite a
>> while so even if it means extra work fixing plugins, I think you'll find more
>> people welcoming this change than not.
>> maybe it would be a wise idea to start a dedicated thread to it for
>> collecting information on identifying the needs/wants, and ways they can be
>> met. This is a great opportunity to thoroughly think things through so the
>> actual server/client design & integration addresses all the necessary
More information about the vdr