[gpodder] Re: gPodder 3.1.0 "The Discipline of D.E." released
- From: Thomas Perl <th.perl@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: gpodder@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 1 Jul 2012 16:40:29 +0200
Hi,
2012/6/30 Joseph Wickremasinghe <jnwickremasinghe@xxxxxxxxx>:
> I updated the patch for device sync to resolve the issues that Bernd
> encountered, and tweak the ui to report progress on downloads and
> synchronization properly. The patch is attached to bug 1579:
>
> https://bugs.gpodder.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1579
>
> [Thomas - you hopefully already got notification that I updated the bug
> report earlier this week.]
Yes, it's queued up in my inbox and I'll get to it this week when I
have some time for Python hacking during EuroPython :)
Thanks,
Thomas
> --- On Mon, 6/11/12, Thomas Perl <th.perl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> From: Thomas Perl <th.perl@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Subject: [gpodder] Re: gPodder 3.1.0 "The Discipline of D.E." released
>> To: gpodder@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Date: Monday, June 11, 2012, 5:08 PM
>> Hi,
>>
>> 2012/6/11 Joseph Wickremasinghe <jnwickremasinghe@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> > I'm quite happy to create a github account but I don't
>> know if it would make things much simpler - I would only
>> push updates at about the same frequency that I've been
>> creating patches anyway, since I wouldn't want anyone
>> pulling from my repository and getting incomplete or broken
>> updates.
>> >
>> > However, if that's how the development team have been
>> co-ordinating efforts I can create an account - let me know
>> :)
>>
>> We could give it a try. I've been commenting on Github for
>> some other
>> projects and patches, and it's quite nice. No problem if you
>> don't
>> want to do it, though - sending patches via the bug tracker
>> is fine as
>> well. If you want to try it, feel free to set up a Github
>> account and
>> "fork" the gPodder repository, then submit a pull request
>> after
>> checking in your patch.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Thomas
>>
>>
>>
>> > --- On Sat, 6/9/12, Bernd Schlapsi <brot@xxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> From: Bernd Schlapsi <brot@xxxxxxxx>
>> >> Subject: [gpodder] Re: gPodder 3.1.0 "The
>> Discipline of D.E." released
>> >> To: gpodder@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> Date: Saturday, June 9, 2012, 2:42 PM
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> Have you ever thought using github?
>> >>
>> >> I applied your patch and get an error when I try to
>> sync two
>> >> episodes:
>> >> Exception in thread Thread-4:
>> >> Traceback (most recent call last):
>> >> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/threading.py", line
>> 551, in
>> >> __bootstrap_inner
>> >> self.run()
>> >> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/threading.py", line
>> 504, in
>> >> run
>> >> self.__target(*self.__args, **self.__kwargs)
>> >> File
>> >> "./gpodder-dev/src/gpodder/gtkui/desktop/sync.py",
>> line 162,
>> >> in
>> >> sync_thread_func
>> >> device.add_sync_tasks(episodes,
>> >> force_played=force_played)
>> >> File "./gpodder-dev/src/gpodder/sync.py", line
>> 226,
>> >> in add_sync_tasks
>> >> if
>> >> self._config.device_sync.after_sync.delete_episodes
>> and not
>> >> track.is_locked:
>> >> File "./gpodder-dev/src/gpodder/model.py", line
>> 159,
>> >> in _deprecated
>> >> raise Exception('Property is deprecated!')
>> >> Exception: Property is deprecated!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ~ Bernd
>> >>
>> >> On 2012-06-09 17:47, Joseph Wickremasinghe wrote:
>> >> > Hi Bernd,
>> >> >
>> >> > I'll let Thomas give you the official opinion
>> but I
>> >> would consider it in a mature beta phase right now.
>> The code
>> >> is on my local machine, but I've been sharing
>> updates in the
>> >> form of patches to the master (3.x) branch of
>> gpodder. I
>> >> would suggest downloading the patch from Bug 1579
>> and
>> >> applying it against your code?
>> >> >
>> >> > https://bugs.gpodder.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1579
>> >> >
>> >> > Currently device sync is only implemented for
>> a
>> >> filesystem-based mp3 player since that's what I
>> use.I have
>> >> access to an iPod shuffle so I can add that in at a
>> later
>> >> date but I want to get filesystem-based sync
>> completely
>> >> finished up & integrated first.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > J.
>> >> > --- On Sat, 6/9/12, Bernd Schlapsi <brot@xxxxxxxx>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> From: Bernd Schlapsi <brot@xxxxxxxx>
>> >> >> Subject: [gpodder] Re: gPodder 3.1.0 "The
>> >> Discipline of D.E." released
>> >> >> To: gpodder@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> >> Date: Saturday, June 9, 2012, 3:22 AM
>> >> >> Hi Joseph,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> what is the current state of you
>> synchronisation
>> >> work?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Do you work on your code local on your
>> machine or
>> >> could you
>> >> >> provide a
>> >> >> github repository with your own
>> device-sync
>> >> branch?
>> >> >> This would be great so it would be easy
>> for
>> >> everyone to test
>> >> >> and track
>> >> >> your progress :-)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I would like to test the device-sync
>> because I
>> >> would like to
>> >> >> see this
>> >> >> feature in the 3.x version of gPodder in
>> the near
>> >> future.
>> >> >> At the moment I'm still using 2.x, but
>> writing code
>> >> for 3.x
>> >> >> which I'm
>> >> >> not able to use, because I need the
>> >> device-sync.:-(
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks,
>> >> >> Bernd
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On 2012-05-28 16:20, Thomas Perl wrote:
>> >> >>> Hi Joseph,
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> (sorry for taking again very long to
>> respond,
>> >> but I
>> >> >> wanted to allocate
>> >> >>> enough time again to make sure I can
>> review the
>> >> patch
>> >> >> and give some
>> >> >>> feedback)
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> 2012/5/20 Joseph Wickremasinghe <jnwickremasinghe@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> >> >>>> Thanks for your comments. After my
>> last
>> >> email, I
>> >> >> switched to a 'one task per episode'
>> approach and
>> >> made some
>> >> >> further progress. I'm including a patch to
>> add
>> >> device sync
>> >> >> to gpodder which uses the 'Downloads' tab
>> to show
>> >> progress.
>> >> >>> Thanks - this looks good. I've left
>> some
>> >> feedback on
>> >> >> the bug report
>> >> >>> where you submitted the patch.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>> The synchronization process opens
>> the
>> >> device and
>> >> >> creates a 'SyncTask' object for each
>> episode
>> >> synchronized.
>> >> >> The SyncTask object is derived from
>> DownloadTask,
>> >> overriding
>> >> >> the run() method. The task is then
>> registered with
>> >> the
>> >> >> download status model and added to the
>> download
>> >> queue, which
>> >> >> then executes it and updates the GUI in
>> the same
>> >> way as for
>> >> >> downloads.
>> >> >>> Yes, that sounds good and should work.
>> For
>> >> later (after
>> >> >> merging or
>> >> >>> just before), we should probably
>> rename the
>> >> classes and
>> >> >> the UI parts
>> >> >>> so that is clear to the user that the
>> downloads
>> >> tab is
>> >> >> also used for
>> >> >>> other progress information (and also
>> in the
>> >> code so
>> >> >> that developers
>> >> >>> reading the code can quickly find
>> their way
>> >> through the
>> >> >> codebase).
>> >> >>>> Please let me know your comments.
>> :) There
>> >> is
>> >> >> probably some code refactoring that could
>> be done,
>> >> perhaps a
>> >> >> reworking of the Device & SyncTask
>> objects,
>> >> too.
>> >> >> Presently the Device adds the Task objects
>> to the
>> >> queue, but
>> >> >> when the tasks are executed they call the
>> add_track
>> >> method
>> >> >> on the device to actually copy the files
>> over.
>> >> Probably not
>> >> >> the cleanest way to do it, but this is
>> still a
>> >> >> work-in-progress :) This is currently
>> only
>> >> implemented for a
>> >> >> filesystem-based mp3 player.
>> >> >>> See the comments in the bug report.
>> Please also
>> >> tell me
>> >> >> if you'd
>> >> >>> rather like me to have a go through
>> the patch
>> >> and do
>> >> >> some clean-ups
>> >> >>> that I think are necessary (mostly
>> just code
>> >> style,
>> >> >> etc..) or if you
>> >> >>> would like to do this yourself (I'm
>> happy with
>> >> both
>> >> >> approaches, and
>> >> >>> don't want to annoy you with requests
>> for
>> >> reformatting
>> >> >> the code ;).
>> >> >>>> I can certainly work on making
>> this an
>> >> extension as
>> >> >> well, but it was easier for me to finalize
>> the
>> >> interface and
>> >> >> then figure out how to make it an
>> extension.
>> >> >>> Yep, I guess the first step could be
>> to
>> >> integrate this,
>> >> >> and then
>> >> >>> re-work this as an extension. At this
>> point,
>> >> I'm quite
>> >> >> happy if we
>> >> >>> could get it in as such (for the Gtk
>> UI only)
>> >> and then
>> >> >> later work on
>> >> >>> refactoring it up to a point where it
>> can be
>> >> used by
>> >> >> the CLI UI as
>> >> >>> well (maybe even Web UI).
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Looking forward to your comments and
>> the next
>> >> patch!
>> >> >> Thanks for
>> >> >>> working on this, it's really
>> appreciated :)
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Thanks,
>> >> >>> Thomas
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>
Other related posts:
