Re: [Rhythmbox-devel] rhythmbox interface

On Sun, 2002-11-24 at 10:36, Luca Ferretti wrote:
> Il sab, 2002-11-23 alle 15:20, Jorn Baayen ha scritto: 
> > > 
> > > Sorry, as you can see this isn't a trouble for me, so I don't understand
> > > well :-(
> > 
> > Well the idea is you can queue songs, so you can listen to music without
> > having to worry about when the current song is ending ;)
> > 
> mmmhhh I begin to understand.... but, hey, it's something like "to be or
> not to be" :-) Very difficult to implement, or, better, very difficult
> to manage well (where well is:"after no one can see <<I like more a
> different way...>>") 

Well, it's prolly hard to do right, but it's defientely something we
should have. It's something I miss personally, and I hear the same from
others too.

> I promise to activate my brain better later (play with wmp and ask about
> itunes), now just brainstorming: 
> Overview: 
>         * rb is a '2 level' app: a player and a music source manager.
>         * we need a way to "load" source (import files, open cd, rip
>           track...)
>         * we need a way to load from source to 'queue'
>         * [actual design can load just one source to queue per time]
>         * we need a simplicity in actions and coherence between
>           different sources


> We need to choose a basement, probably change some architectural
> feature!!! Ad we can't fail!!!!! 
> fork(); 
>         1. keep actual design ('source based') and 'hide' queue features
>         2. make queue feature well visible and make sources just a way
>            to load queue
> Case 1 explanation. 
>     Just manage queue as advanced (and initially hidden) feature. We
>     don't need to rethink all interface, so we can place an Edit->Queue
>     (or View->Queue) and a rgclick->Add to Queue or whatever. If I want
>     play a certain song, or an album or all song from an artist, or a CD
>     track, or entire Group after current played I can choose "Add". 
>     If I want manage queue I can choose "Edit". In "Queue dialog window"
>     you can reorder, remove... 
>     Just a trouble: dynamic queue or static queue? where dynamic is
>     "once you played a song added to queue, delete song from queue",
>     static don't delete. This is an important implementation question,
>     IMHO. 

Yeah, well, we definetely need to get rid of views.

> Case 2 explanation. 
>     "Current queued songs" is the kernel, so we need to place it in main
>     window and place "sources manager" in secondary windows. Question:
>     what's happening on startup? Load last queue? Load all lib? Load
>     nothing? Boh! 
>     There is a better separation between playing feature and source
>     feature: in "player" you have only planned songs and playing
>     controls, in source manager you don't have player buttons, just
>     manage ones. This can save interface changes too, probably. 

Yes something like this. However, one shouldn't *need* to build a
playlist first before playing. It should be possible to directly play
from the lib as we do now, but also possible to queue songs.

> Better IMHO: 
>     No idea. Personally I like current design. Case 2 remember me old
>     xmms style, where you have to load a playlist before start
>     playing and user must choose a source to play something...
>     Besides case 1 has some playing non-coherence: load more then 1 song
>     in queue when you have shuffle play, play/pause/stop related to
>     queue or sources...
>     Following Havoc free-software-ui.html we have to choose one, the
>     better for all users. OK. guys, let's go!

Indeed ;)


> Cheers
> _______________________________________________
> rhythmbox-devel mailing list

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]