[protocol77]

run something like linux or windows in a vm or even locally on the host machine and just leave xbmc running in the background with the mysql configured advancedsettings.xml in the userdata folder then if all have the same file they will be linked and sync with each other through mysql then just run either a manual scrape or a scheduled scrape (i think there is an addon for this) it will perform that scan and then the other machine when turned on will auto update

I have not need for this myself as i have recently stopped using mysql as i no longer have more than one machine i need to have a shared database with i have just two HTPC's my one in my bedroom and another in a family member's bedroom and we watch different stuff and the stuff we do watch that is the same is usually at different times and not together so no need for making watched statuses and things synced up so we both have seperate local databases on our HTPC's which i have the xbmc backup addon schedule once month to backup to my server in networked folders so in case a machine crashes i can restore i probably should make backups more frequent but not too worried about losing the database i can always re-scrape and re-check watched items if worst comes to worst

[jacintech.fire]

Please correct me if I am wrong; but the consensus that seems to emerge is that:
--XBMC is designed to the used as a stand-alone media player, in a single location; and with local media files (i.e files residing on a hard drive of the same machine as the XBMC software). That is it. That is the end game.
--Any attempt to extend this basic functionality, although IT MAY BE possible in most cases, requires extraordinary effort and yields a fast diminishing returns.
--This basic, limited functionality DOES NOT take into consideration scenarios such as
(a) An ever expanding media library
(b) Multiple Synchronized Clients
© Shared resources among multiple clients
(d) Remote Storage Solutions
(e) Distributed/Co-operative Storage Solutions
(f) A client MAY not be always ON, while the backend (storage, database, etc WILL most likely always be)

**XMBC Gotham: Added initial support for running libxbmc.so headless (without GUI) as a background service / deamon**
https://github.com/wernerb/docker-xbmc-s...Dockerfile
http://forum.xbmc.org/showthread.php?tid...pid1652955
*********************************************************************************************************************************************
There is nothing wrong with XBMC being limited, as it performs its basic mission superbly; but please keep in mind that the idea of an open source project is to evolve and adapt to change. To push the envelope of innovation and creativity.
The way media is being consumed is changing; the way media is stored is changing; the infrastructure to manage all this complex media is also changing. If XBMC is to remain relevant, its community must be willing to at least consider these changes

[Martijn]

Oh man you are so wrong here.
You might want to start re-reading the manual and recent blog posts before stating such wrong things

[jacintech.fire]

@Martijn,

Just voicing an observation that MAY WELL turn out to be wrong. I said it from the start...
The keyword is that all these things are, to varying degrees, possible; but each requires effort and the results vary. I think we can all agree on this.
"...Please correct me if I am wrong..."
"...the consensus that seems..."

[Martijn]

@Martijn,

Just voicing an observation that MAY WELL turn out to be wrong. I said it from the start...
The keyword is that all these things are, to varying degrees, possible; but each requires effort and the results vary. I think we can all agree on this.
"...Please correct me if I am wrong..."
"...the consensus that seems..."

and I stated you are wrong.
it's certainly not hard, and the consensus is certainly NOT what you stated. It's YOUR consensus.
I also won't go defending/explaining why. The wiki/forum/blog posts are full of statements that will undermine your consensus.

[jacintech.fire]

@Martijn,

Not hard (hard is, after all, a relative term). It simply requires effort (and some basic skills) to extend the functionality of XBMC beyond its default condition (again, nothing wrong with that).

[Powerhouse]

So I run something similar to what you are asking in my house setup, and here is how I do it.

1. I have a Server with all my storage on it, and have XBMC install on it as well.
2. I have a few XBMC machines around the house (2 PC's, a NUC, Nexus 7 tablets, and some laptops).
3. I use the scrapper MediaElch, to get all the artwork, nfo's etc for all my Movies, TV Series, and even some Music. MediaElch has a XBMC section that if you put in the IP Address (of my Server), will update that system with all the updates it does (normally only when new Movies or TV shows are added to the Server).
4. For every XBMC machine around the house, except the main one set in MediaElch (the Server), I have them do an automatic update at Midnight, and/or when powered on. So that way, all XBMC machines have the latest artwork and nfo's that may have been updated, since the last time this device was powered on (or used the day before).

Anyone, from reading your post, this sounds to me what you would like XBMC to do.

[jacintech.fire]

@Powerhouse,

Thank you for your reply...
I already have my setup up and running (3.5+ years and counting)...
This post was just me trying to understand what the overall goal and direction of XBMC is...As it seems (for me at least) to be the stated goal was for XBMC to be a self-contained media center, rather than a connected (network-aware or cloud-aware), multi-client media streaming solution. And if that is the overarching goal, then that is fine.
It is just that things are changing, moving in a different direction where media is consumed from within a connected (network-aware or cloud-aware), multi-client media streaming environment...

[saitoh183]

I personally moved to Mediabrowser 3 (Server) + XBMC as a frontend with XBMB3C. Central server that can feed all my clients around the house + giving full media access when i access the server from outside my network wiht no overly complicated setup and configuration and maintenance is centralized to the MBS (metedata...etc..) I used to have MySQL setup with the a XBMC client installed on my WHS2011 acting like a server to scrape all the info into MYSQL with weekly MySQL Dumps and backup to GoogleDrive. It worked great but just found having to use third party to fix metadata when XBMC scraper would fail was just annoying and MYSQL was alot slower compared to using MBS. On a plus note MBS allows me to also not be limited to only using XBMC client to access content.

[Ned Scott]

Please correct me if I am wrong; but the consensus that seems to emerge is that:
--XBMC is designed to the used as a stand-alone media player, in a single location; and with local media files (i.e files residing on a hard drive of the same machine as the XBMC software). That is it. That is the end game.

--Any attempt to extend this basic functionality, although IT MAY BE possible in most cases, requires extraordinary effort and yields a fast diminishing returns.
--This basic, limited functionality DOES NOT take into consideration scenarios such as
(a) An ever expanding media library
(b) Multiple Synchronized Clients
© Shared resources among multiple clients
(d) Remote Storage Solutions
(e) Distributed/Co-operative Storage Solutions
(f) A client MAY not be always ON, while the backend (storage, database, etc WILL most likely always be)

That couldn't be further from the truth. It is a stand-alone media player, but it can work in conjunction with a number of configurations, servers, network protocols, and more. The assertion that XBMC only works with/supports local media is either trolling or ignorance. Several features for using XBMC with external servers were specifically added just recently in v13. XBMC can now send wake-on-lan packets, has an improved UPnP client (that works with far more than just XBMC), and a heck of a lot more. Where on earth did you get this conclusion from? No really, I want to know, where did you pull this from?

Not to mention all of the upcoming library sharing stuff that we mention on the forums almost every chance we get.

There is nothing wrong with XBMC being limited, as it performs its basic mission superbly; but please keep in mind that the idea of an open source project is to evolve and adapt to change. To push the envelope of innovation and creativity.
The way media is being consumed is changing; the way media is stored is changing; the infrastructure to manage all this complex media is also changing. If XBMC is to remain relevant, its community must be willing to at least consider these changes

Sometimes I think you write stuff like this just to piss people off. You manage to say some of the most dickish things, and then you attempt to mask it as some kind of light hearted debate that is just in the spirit of progress.

I only bother to reply to help point out just how wrong you are on this, so that other people don't catch your stupid.

[Ned Scott]

and in reply to your original post:

Heimdall
http://forum.xbmc.org/showthread.php?tid=134012
https://github.com/topfs2/heimdall

[nickr]

and in reply to your original post:

Heimdall
http://forum.xbmc.org/showthread.php?tid=134012
https://github.com/topfs2/heimdall

With the last commit in April 2013, which is a shame because it looked like a promising addition.

[Ned Scott]

It's still going to be used, it's just that not everything happens all at once. It's not like milk and it won't just expire. For example, RetroPlayer will require Heimdall for the games library feature.

[nickr]

Yeah the fact that there have been no commits for over a year looks bad, but maybe it is perfect already ;-)

[jacintech.fire]

@nickr, @ned Scott,

"...I only bother to reply to help point out just how wrong you are on this, so that other people don't catch your stupid..."
Like I have said many times, the more insulting your comments, the less valid your arguments are.
I understand you that your entire personality and your sense of worth is wrapped up in being "Team-XBMC Wiki Guy" and as such you are believer; which in and of itself deprives you of any objectivity, so I will not hold that against you. To each its own, live and let live, etc, etc.

"...Any attempt to extend this basic functionality, although IT MAY BE possible in most cases, requires extraordinary effort and yields a fast diminishing returns.."
literally describes the process of incorporating things like Samba, MYSQL, Library Synching, Headless-Mode (how long did it take for this to be included and even now the process is rather tortured to say the least?), etc.

It means that it is to varying degrees POSSIBLE; but it requires significant effort (and varying degrees of skills) to accomplish, as opposed to the effort required to use it on its default configuration (as a stand-alone media player, with locally stored media files). But like I said, you are a believer and your entire sense of worth is wrapped up in being "Team-XBMC Wiki Guy", so objectivity is not an option.

Let me be clear XBMC IS THE BEST MEDIA PLAYER available right now. Bar none. But the landscape is changing rapidly and if XBMC is to stay relevant, it must keep up. Being able to consume your media from the HTPC is no longer enough.

I know that my opinions are unpopular and that by even speaking I risk being banned outright; but somebody has to sound the alarm...