Posts: 1,886
Joined: Jan 2015
Reputation:
126
ksooo
Team-Kodi Developer
Posts: 1,886
Yeah, I closed it because it was a 100% duplicate of the existing Trac issue for exactly the feature requested here.
Regarding your side node to the original being 8 months old: All Kodi devs are volunteers and only implement stuff they find interesting for one reason or another. There is no way for you or anybody else to put any pressure on them. All you can do is to convince a Kodi dev to invest some of his spare time to implement this feature. Side notes of this kind are not really helpful to achieve your goal. Trust me. ;-)
Posts: 524
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation:
10
2015-12-09, 23:47
(This post was last modified: 2015-12-10, 00:23 by oldtvwatcher.)
ksoooooooooo, I could understand that if I were requesting an entirely new feature. But as a user, I just can't help but be a little bit upset when developers up and change the way software works and it causes a problem that wasn't present in previous versions. I'm sorry if that comes through in my posts, but the other problem is that when you are running Linux as the OS and you upgrade it (as you eventually are forced to do in order to maintain security) then you are forced to install a new version of the software. This does not happen in other versions. For example I found out that in the OS X version, about half the time when I attempted to run Kodi Isengard, it crashed at startup, and once it did that it would never start unless I basically did a full reinstall of Kodi. So I went back to Kodi Helix until a few days ago when I installed Jarvis. I could not have done that (roll back to a previous version) on my HTPC's that run Linux, since the operating system was reinstalled prior to installing Kodi. Jarvis appears to have fixed the problem of it crashing at startup (thank you!) but has introduced these new issues. I do realize it's still in beta so I fully expected some issues, and I was merely reporting them but when I see that an issue was reported 8 months ago and no action was taken back then, my first thought is that it wasn't considered a pressing issue at the time, and now that others have mentioned it I just thought it might be worth mentioning it again. I think what irritated me more than anything, though, was that I tried to give a very full and complete description of the issue and you closed it in favor of an issue with a one line description of the problem that had never gone anywhere. Seems to me that if the original issue had a more thorough explanation, maybe one of the devs would have understood back then why it's a problem.
Just as a general observation, and you may not like me saying this (and I assure you it doesn't apply just to Kodi) but there are times I genuinely wish software developers would just fix outstanding bugs and do security upgrades and leave everything that works alone. I feel this way about OS X, which has screwed the pooch when it comes to local networking in the last few versions (to the point that I have to use SFTP to transfer files to other systems on the local network). OS X was a great operating system about four versions ago, but it seems to get suckier every time they release a new version. I know Windows users who have felt the same way about Windows. Whenever you install new software and you go to use a feature that worked perfectly in the previous version and suddenly doesn't work the way you'd like anymore, you just kind of get that sinking feeling of "here we go again" (and can you honestly say you've never felt that way about ANY piece of software?). This doesn't happen nearly as often in Kodi as in some other projects, and I do often appreciate it when Kodi adds new functionality, but this will be the second major version of Kodi in a row where something significant was broken that relates to the TVHeadEnd PVR addon. So when you say that the devs "only implement stuff they find interesting for one reason or another", I guess I just don't understand why developers find it interesting to break something that's working fine, but don't seem to find it interesting enough to fix the thing they have broken when users report it. If I had the smarts to write software (whether I was giving it away for free or not, and more than likely I would give it away for free), I can guarantee you that fixing something I had broken, that had worked in a previous version, would be my highest priority, no matter how many "more interesting" things I had to work on. But I guess I'm one of the few people who feel that way anymore.
I do realize that in this particular case, there could be a genuine difference of opinion over whether the timers are "broken", since they actually show more information than they did before. The problem is that it is too much information; you could be drowned in data (disabled timers) that are not giving the information you really want to see, which is along the lines of "what programs are scheduled to record tonight"?
So I'll shut up about it now, and just hope that this will be addressed before the release version of Jarvis comes out.
