Kodi Community Forum
Maraschino (formerly HTPC Frontend) - a summary web interface for your XBMC HTPC - Printable Version

+- Kodi Community Forum (https://forum.kodi.tv)
+-- Forum: Support (https://forum.kodi.tv/forumdisplay.php?fid=33)
+--- Forum: Supplementary Tools for Kodi (https://forum.kodi.tv/forumdisplay.php?fid=116)
+--- Thread: Maraschino (formerly HTPC Frontend) - a summary web interface for your XBMC HTPC (/showthread.php?tid=113136)



- _Mikie_ - 2011-12-10

DejaVu Wrote:This is correct.
Regardless of the settings, if SanZNBd has nothing to do, Maraschino hides it. This is better than having an idle module.

I think he's saying when there is a queue the queue isn't showing up in the module.


- steve1977 - 2011-12-11

Just updated to the latest "maraschino" branch from GIT. Few issues:

1) Don't know how to get Sickbeard-API to work. I am accessing from outside my home network. Would I need to enter the local IP or the SB-external-URL?

2) Sabnzbd continues not to show up

3) There appears to be a new Bug. On mouse-over any app from the application widget, there is a small line on the top added indiacting "launching app", which leads to all apps being moved?


Thanks a lot in advance!!!


- thezoggy - 2011-12-11

steve1977 Wrote:Just updated to the latest "maraschino" branch from GIT. Few issues:

1) Don't know how to get Sickbeard-API to work. I am accessing from outside my home network. Would I need to enter the local IP or the SB-external-URL?

2) Sabnzbd continues not to show up

3) There appears to be a new Bug. On mouse-over any app from the application widget, there is a small line on the top added indiacting "launching app", which leads to all apps being moved?


Thanks a lot in advance!!!

1)
if you are running sickbeard from git, update to latest source.
if you are running sickbeard binaries, update to 491 manually.
once running sickbeard that has the API, go enable the API and generate a key at the Config > General page.

If you are running SB and Maraschino on the same comp.. then you reference SB via local ip.
Then you'd access Maraschino from remote with an ip back to that machine.

2)
sabnzbd.. are you binding it to localhost? 0.0.0.0? ipv6? try using your local ip..

3)
clear browser cache?


- mrkipling - 2011-12-11

Well, I'm back! Seems like you guys have been busy Smile

How would you recommend that we get all of your new code merged successfully into the main repo? Individual pull requests would be the best bet but there's a lot of code.

I have a proposal. How about I add the active contributors to the official repo (I'm mostly aware of DejaVa and gugahoi as I've been away for so long, but know that there are more, so their suggestions would be appreciated)? We'll create a "prerelease" branch which has everybody's additions (that are worth adding) to date, which can be pulled in from the existing test repo. Users will have the option of using this unstable, more feature-rich branch early if they want, and when it's solid enough it can be merged into master.

Going forward (to avoid similar messy code situations where things have built up for too long) any new features will still be worked on on a new branch, eventually merged into stable for testing, and when ready stable will be merged into master as part of a larger release.

I've created an account with a ticket system (Lighthouse - you can find it here). Let's use it for us developers to discuss the direction that project should take, what needs to be done, etc. and stop clogging up the forum with this stuff Smile

Thoughts?


- _Mikie_ - 2011-12-11

mrkipling Wrote:Well, I'm back! Seems like you guys have been busy Smile

How would you recommend that we get all of your new code merged successfully into the main repo? Individual pull requests would be the best bet but there's a lot of code.

I have a proposal. How about I add the active contributors to the official repo (I'm mostly aware of DejaVa and gugahoi as I've been away for so long, but know that there are more, so their suggestions would be appreciated)? We'll create a "prerelease" branch which has everybody's additions (that are worth adding) to date, which can be pulled in from the existing test repo. Users will have the option of using this unstable, more feature-rich branch early if they want, and when it's solid enough it can be merged into master.

Going forward (to avoid similar messy code situations where things have built up for too long) any new features will still be worked on on a new branch, eventually merged into stable for testing, and when ready stable will be merged into master as part of a larger release.

I've created an account with a ticket system (Lighthouse - you can find it here). Let's use it for us developers to discuss the direction that project should take, what needs to be done, etc. and stop clogging up the forum with this stuff Smile

Thoughts?

Sounds good! One suggestion. I'm sure you will also be making addition so instead of you making additions directly into the account that has the master release and pre release code on it why don't you create/use https://github.com/Maraschino/maraschino as the master master repo that everyone gets the files from and then use your personal account for development. So you'd just be managing two accounts. EDIT: We'd just need to download all the code off the repo and create a maraschino repo instead of having it branch off yours.

Simlair to the way the guys did it when creating the sickbeard api. They had sickbeard/sickbeard and then zoggy/sickbeard and lad/sickbeard pushed to sickbeard/sickbeard.

Just makes sense to me going forward so the project isn't directly linked to someone's personal account even though the project is always still going to be your. Not trying to take that away from you Smile

Take it or leave it Smile

EDIT: Main reason behind my thinking is when MFP's original creator went MIA we were stuck without access to the repo. You can give certain people permission but its still your personal account so a community account might be better.


- mrkipling - 2011-12-11

_Mikie_ Wrote:Sounds good! One suggestion. I'm sure you will also be making addition so instead of you making additions directly into the account that has the master release and pre release code on it why don't you create/use https://github.com/Maraschino/maraschino as the master master repo that everyone gets the files from and then use your personal account for development. So you'd just be managing two accounts.

Simlair to the way the guys did it when creating the sickbeard api. They had sickbeard/sickbeard and then zoggy/sickbeard and lad/sickbeard pushed to sickbeard/sickbeard.

Just makes sense to me going forward so the project isn't directly linked to someone's personal account even though the project is always still going to be your. Not trying to take that away from you Smile

Take it or leave it Smile

I'm happy to use Maraschino/maraschino vs. mrkipling/maraschino to host the official repo (EDIT: see below post, this plan has changed). However, I still think that the master branch on Maraschino/maraschino needs a bit of tidying up before it's ready for prime time - I'd rather that it became to the unstable/"prerelease" branch and mrkipling/master became the master branch. Then we'd feature freeze for a short while, polish prerelease, merge it into master, then figure out what the next priorities should be. How does all this sound?

Would love to to get all of your opinions before going ahead and doing this, but it does sound like the way to go.

Also, if all collaborators on github.com/Maraschino could PM their email address then I'll invite them to lighthouse where we can dicuss this stuff, manage tickets, etc.


- mrkipling - 2011-12-11

Actually, thinking about it, do we really need a separate Maraschino/maraschino account? I don't really see any drawbacks adding people as collaborators to my repo, unless I'm missing something obvious. I think this is actually the way to go.

The new plan is:

* Add the most active contributors to mrkipling/maraschino
* Add the most active contributors to Lighthouse
* Create a "prerelease" branch; pull Maraschino/maraschino into it
* Work on tidying prerelease; when happy merge into master
* From then on, new features on new branches, which then go into prerelease when ready, then prerelease into master when I think that prerelease is ready
* Discuss on Lighthouse the direction that the project should head in, how we can work effectively as a team, and all that kinda stuff

I'll add collaborators now, and set up the prerelease branch Smile


- Shaolin - 2011-12-11

Welcome back MrK and congratulations on the recent nuptials. Looking forward to seeing what Maraschino evolves into now you're back.


- mrkipling - 2011-12-11

Shaolin Wrote:Welcome back MrK and congratulations on the recent nuptials. Looking forward to seeing what Maraschino evolves into now you're back.

Thank you Smile


- mrkipling - 2011-12-11

Okay - gugahoi and DejaVu now have read/write access to the official maraschino repo.

I've added a new branch - "prerelease" - which contains all of their amazing additions since I've been gone. If anybody would like to use this branch then just "git pull" and then "git checkout prerelease"; to change back to the less feature-rich but more stable master branch do "git checkout master". Make sure to restart your web server after doing this.

gugahoi, DejaVu: I see that you're already using Maraschino's Lighthouse account - cool Smile We should probably move discussion about development to the messages section of Lighthouse. I'll start a topic.


- gugahoi - 2011-12-11

mrkipling Wrote:Actually, thinking about it, do we really need a separate Maraschino/maraschino account? I don't really see any drawbacks adding people as collaborators to my repo, unless I'm missing something obvious. I think this is actually the way to go.

The new plan is:

* Add the most active contributors to mrkipling/maraschino
* Add the most active contributors to Lighthouse
* Create a "prerelease" branch; pull Maraschino/maraschino into it
* Work on tidying prerelease; when happy merge into master
* From then on, new features on new branches, which then go into prerelease when ready, then prerelease into master when I think that prerelease is ready
* Discuss on Lighthouse the direction that the project should head in, how we can work effectively as a team, and all that kinda stuff

I'll add collaborators now, and set up the prerelease branch Smile

That seems a pretty good idea. The only feature that only you would be able to do is go into the ADMIN section of the repo. However, if one really wants to change things and in the future you decide to abandon the project, one can always fork so I see no harm in using yours.

Regarding the work structure, everything sounds about right to me. I've been using local branches to create my modifications and after verifying they work on my computer, I merge them into master. Ideally, for a collaborative project, one branch for each new addition is right. Just as I was doing on my branch.

Would you like to add me as an admin on lighthouse too? Or would you rather be the only one?

BTW, great to have ya back. Hope you had a great time these pasts couple of weeks. Congrats.


- mrkipling - 2011-12-11

gugahoi Wrote:That seems a pretty good idea. The only feature that only you would be able to do is go into the ADMIN section of the repo. However, if one really wants to change things and in the future you decide to abandon the project, one can always fork so I see no harm in using yours.

Regarding the work structure, everything sounds about right to me. I've been using local branches to create my modifications and after verifying they work on my computer, I merge them into master. Ideally, for a collaborative project, one branch for each new addition is right. Just as I was doing on my branch.

Would you like to add me as an admin on lighthouse too? Or would you rather be the only one?

BTW, great to have ya back. Hope you had a great time these pasts couple of weeks. Congrats.

Excellent! Re. branches and work structure and all that, I'm in the process of writing a message on Lighthouse for your guys so that we're all on the same page. Will post a link here when done.

I'll make you an admin on Lighthouse too, better if it's not all dependant on me Smile (PM me your email address please)


- mrkipling - 2011-12-11

gugahoi, DejaVu: I posted my plan for how things should proceed on Lighthouse. Your thoughts would be welcome!

You can find it here.


- steve1977 - 2011-12-11

thezoggy Wrote:1)
if you are running sickbeard from git, update to latest source.
if you are running sickbeard binaries, update to 491 manually.
once running sickbeard that has the API, go enable the API and generate a key at the Config > General page.

If you are running SB and Maraschino on the same comp.. then you reference SB via local ip.
Then you'd access Maraschino from remote with an ip back to that machine.

I am running 491 and have generated an API. SB runs well. Maraschino and SB both run on the same machine. Tried the following config, but nothing shows up:

SB API: the SB API
SB user and PW: obvious
SB IP: 192.168.1.110/TV
SB Port: 9005

thezoggy Wrote:3)
clear browser cache?

That did the trick ;-) Thanks!


- Aenima99x - 2011-12-11

steve1977 Wrote:I am running 491 and have generated an API. SB runs well. Maraschino and SB both run on the same machine. Tried the following config, but nothing shows up:

SB API: the SB API
SB user and PW: obvious
SB IP: 192.168.1.110/TV
SB Port: 9005

You've got the IP/Port info backwards, try ths -
SB IP: 192.168.1.110
SB Port: 9005/TV