[blackoutworm]

Hi there.
Using a custom directory listing rather than the standard unprotected one is a great idea. It's way more secure.
There are a few good ones out there. Like this one. http://www.directorylister.com/ and this one: http://www.evoluted.net/thinktank/web-de...ing-script
This give you full control and you can hide specific files and so on. Not to mention, not every hosting company is gonna allow open directories for security purposes.
But kodi does not support any of these. Is there a reason for that?
Hacking and ddossing is becoming more and more common it seems like, so I wish they would look into this.

[Roman_V_M]

As I understand it's the relative directory structure that matters. It doesn't matter now you serve it: via real directory listing or some webapp's routing mechanism.

[blackoutworm]

As I understand it's the relative directory structure that matters. It doesn't matter now you serve it: via real directory listing or some webapp's routing mechanism.

I think you're missing the point.
See. The only thing that works now is an open directory.
More and more hosting providers do not allow that, for security reasons.
So if Kodi would allow these directory listing scripts, that would solve a ton of problems.
And again, a directory listing script gives you more control.

[Roman_V_M]

As I understand it's the relative directory structure that matters. It doesn't matter now you serve it: via real directory listing or some webapp's routing mechanism.

See. The only thing that works now is an open directory.

This is simply not true so your further reasoning is based on a false assumption. All you need for a Kodi addon repo is a static file hosting. It may or may not provide open directory listing - it really does not matter. The fact that some Kodi addon repos (including the official one, if I'm not mistaken) use open directory listing does not make it a mandatory requirement.
For example, I'm using GitHub Pages for my personal addon repo, and GitHub Pages surely do not provide open directory listing.

[blackoutworm]

As I understand it's the relative directory structure that matters. It doesn't matter now you serve it: via real directory listing or some webapp's routing mechanism.

See. The only thing that works now is an open directory.

This is simply not true so your further reasoning is based on a false assumption. All you need for a Kodi addon repo is a static file hosting. It may or may not provide open directory listing - it really does not matter. The fact that some Kodi addon repos (including the official one, if I'm not mistaken) use open directory listing does not make it a mandatory requirement.
For example, I'm using GitHub Pages for my personal addon repo, and GitHub Pages surely do not provide open directory listing.

Right. GitHub is an alternative.
But if you want to host your own repo, you need an open directory, which is a security bracket.
And as I was saying, a lot of hosting companies do not allow open directory listing.
And I for one prefer to host my stuff on my own site.
So this is indeed something the Kodi team needs to look into and find a solution for.

[Roman_V_M]

Right. GitHub is an alternative.

And how is GitHub different?

But if you want to host your own repo, you need an open directory

No, you don't.

[blackoutworm]

No, you don't.

You do. Case in point, here's an example:
kodi.me.ht.
Add this source to kodi and it'll appear as empty.
This is my test repo.

[Roman_V_M]

You do. Case in point, here's an example:
kodi.me.ht.
Add this source to kodi and it'll appear as empty.
This is my test repo.

Which source? This is not a Kodi addon repo but some file hosting. If you happen to upload a couple of addons there, it does not make this file hosting a repo. A Kodi addon repository has a very specific structure. Read Kodi Wiki on this matter.

[blackoutworm]

You do. Case in point, here's an example:
kodi.me.ht.
Add this source to kodi and it'll appear as empty.
This is my test repo.

Which source? This is not a Kodi addon repo but some file hosting. If you happen to upload a couple of addons there, it does not make this file hosting a repo. A Kodi addon repository has a very specific structure. Read Kodi Wiki on this matter.

No it's not.
Okay so you have no idea what I am talking about here, do you?
Just to clarify. This is an open directory:

REMOVED LINK TO BANNED REPO

This is a directory using a directory listing script, which is what I've been talking about all this time:
http://kodi.me.ht.
In this example, I'm using the 2nd directory listing script I mentioned in my first post. I mentioned 2.

[Roman_V_M]

Just to clarify. This is an open directory:
REMOVED LINK
This is a directory using a directory listing script, which is what I've been talking about all this time:
http://kodi.me.ht.
In this example, I'm using the 2nd directory listing script I mentioned in my first post. I mentioned 2.

And what all this have to do with Kodi addon repositories? The method of presenting content on your site is completely up to you and this method is not connected to Kodi application at all. Again, if you have uploaded a bunch of ZIP-ped addons to some file hosting does not make this file hosting a Kodi addon repository. You need to create a very specific directory structure (and it does not matter if this folder structure can be listed in a web browser or not) and generate a meta addon.xml file for all your addons and a MD5 checksum for this meta addon.xml. Only then such structure will be recognized by Kodi as an addon repository from which you can install addons using Kodi addon manager.

[blackoutworm]

You're not with me here, are you?
It's not "some file hosting site". It's an open directory. Both those links are.
Only difference is, the 2nd one (mine) is using a php script to show directory content because the hosting company will not allow open directory.
Do you understand now?
So again. This is what kodi needs to fix. They need to allow directory listings that aren't directly open.
Because then it will be easier for people to host repositories on their own site if their hosting companies decide to be secure.

[Martijn]

And I removed the banned repo from you post and you put it back. Remove it now or get trashed in the bin.

[blackoutworm]

And I removed the banned repo from you post and you put it back. Remove it now or get trashed in the bin.

Wait. Was that a message to me?
I don't have a repo. Not yet at least.

[Martijn]

And I removed the banned repo from you post and you put it back. Remove it now or get trashed in the bin.

Wait. Was that a message to me?
I don't have a repo. Not yet at least.

You linked to one as example which contained banned stuff.

[blackoutworm]

And I removed the banned repo from you post and you put it back. Remove it now or get trashed in the bin.

Wait. Was that a message to me?
I don't have a repo. Not yet at least.

You linked to one as example which contained banned stuff.

Oh I'm sorry about that. I'll find a different example.
But you understand what I mean though. Right?
Not every hosting service is gonna allow open directories.
So it would be great if kodi was able to use directory listing scripts such as the 2 I listed in the first post, right?