(2015-06-19, 21:32)C.Taylor Wrote: Your negative opinion on Atmos doesn't make my argument any less relevant.
Completely correct.
Quote:Who claimed Blu-ray and DVD tags are to be used for resolution? Not I. They are tags that use naming convention to indicate something that can't be pulled from the stream. And Atmos is an audio source anyways.
Then I misunderstood your comment. My apologies. However, Atmos is not a "source".
Quote:So 3D tags are pulled from the stream of a MVC MKV or Blu-ray ISO? Oh wait.
Isn't that a moot point since Kodi doesn't playback 3D MVC? You'd have a point if it was a format we supported, but it's not. Once (if?) support for MVC is added then I would expect a good faith effort to extract the 3D information from the stream details, if possible.
Quote:And 3D is just as much "bullshit", as you put it, to sell people new TV's with expensive active glasses, yet the dev team felt inclined to show flagging support for it.
I'm not a fan of 3D either. If anything, 3D annoys me much more than any of the audio format purists.
Quote:Bottom line is the devs don't care. And they sure are a touchy bunch when asked if they are going to help out those who enjoy using Kodi but don't have the knowledge or time to figure it out themselves. They'd just rather blame someone for asking and hurl around baseless insults with impunity.
No, people are annoyed with the attitude you have. You seem to think that it would be easy for us to add this because you were able to figure out the skin changes to do this based on file name. However...
- This is a skin-specific thing. It wouldn't be universal, so it would only be for Confluence.
- File naming conventions are not taken lightly. Something that seems harmless still needs to be checked to see if it might interfere with other regex patterns that Kodi looks for. Even if it's all safe, adding to naming conventions is something we try to avoid whenever possible because such things tend to stick around for years and years.
- It might be an easy adjustment to Confluence, but asking users to change all of their files is an added burden on them, which creates a support burden for us. It's something that then has to be documented and taught to users.
No earth shattering reason, sure, but still enough to keep it off someones "radar", as you put it. Instead, I imagine our devs are more interested in attempting a more reliable way to trigger such a flag. However, at this point in the discussion no one was opposed to adding the name-based flag, but you seemed to be offended that we didn't make the changes ourselves.
It doesn't matter how easy it is for us if we are not interested in that method. We are volunteers. If every tiny request like that was taken up by us personally, then that would add up to enough man hours to make working on Kodi a pain in the ass and not enjoyable. You are the one who wants this feature, then you are the one who should take the time to figure out how to queue up a pull request. You said you had no time to learn, but you expected Team Kodi members to take their free time adding something the don't want. It doesn't matter if it would only take two minutes, that's just insulting.
I'm not a dev. I look at code and I go cross-eyed. Yet, when I wanted to make changes that were similar to the ones you want, I made a good faith effort to learn how to do this on github. I was the one asking for a change to make my usage easier, because it was something I was interested in, so I at least tried. Even if someone else had the time to do it themselves, it's really entitled to expect them to do it when they're not the one who is interested in the addition.
Despite all of that, fritsch, the only dev who's responded to this request, had been willing to add this in. He defended the idea to martijn, and also said it was better than nothing. Yet you still act like a dick about this, why? Why do you feel so wronged, just because some of us felt slightly insulted at how entitled you were acting? Now you've even lost his support.
The maor you know.... *cue song*