it would be awesome to write to the different dev's and ask if they are interested in get the kde standard music player. all are QT and to be the standard player means also to get a lot of users, so maybe they are also interested.

vlc has also a music collection section in the playlist and first it looks nice, but I don't can say watch this folder or something like that. You can only add an folder for the playlist. But again maybe the vlc dev's are interested in add the watch folder feature. In general vlc is a movie player but it's well known and they have an theme editor.

@ochurlaud
One problem I have with the bundled collection management is, that every player has its own implementation and writes its own database. I would expect at least that the plasma audio player and the other plasma apps (dolphin, baloo, pmc, ...) share this information.
Most people I know don't use the collection management features of audio players, no matter how big the collection is. If they want a really well organized collection, they use a tool like musicbrainz to tag the files and then use the automatically created collection based on these tags. If the don't care, they use whatever collection the player creates on default, but won't start editing meta information in the player, or they don't bother at all with collections and just use the file system.

Don't get me wrong. I think a good (automatic created) collection is a must need for any modern music player. But i don't see the point to edit the collection in a basic music player (and even less in a media center).

I think that it's exactly what we want to do. Your metadata can be edited by so software, but it's not a priority. However having a tree view or a grid view or.whatever fancy IS mandatory...

So at the end we.need a database model that put the things in the good views. The playin, playlists management (?) Are delegated to libvlc.

Hello,

I remember there were legal issues preventing VLC from being included by default in (US-based?) Linux distributions. If confirmed, I'd say it's enough not to use libVLC.

Louis

louis94 wrote:I remember there were legal issues preventing VLC from being included by default in (US-based?) Linux distributions. If confirmed, I'd say it's enough not to use libVLC.

This is a problem that can hopefully be fixed by VLC together with packagers/distribution.
Phonon alternatively has a GStreamer backend, but the VLC backend is better (e.g. Tomahawk changed to libVLC directly because of problems with phonon-gstreamer, so there was no advantage using Phonon).

Horrendus wrote:

louis94 wrote:I remember there were legal issues preventing VLC from being included by default in (US-based?) Linux distributions. If confirmed, I'd say it's enough not to use libVLC.

This is a problem that can hopefully be fixed by VLC together with packagers/distribution.
Phonon alternatively has a GStreamer backend, but the VLC backend is better (e.g. Tomahawk changed to libVLC directly because of problems with phonon-gstreamer, so there was no advantage using Phonon).

+1 to solving VLC distro issues, without libVLC we would be building from scratch since the next viable options for media processing(phonon, gstreamer, qtmultimedia, qtav) are lower level.

I wanted to take advantage of this topic to make a more general question to VDG!
Given that according to my point of view, currently the design improvements of KDE are truly excellent and that from this point of view, although you can always improve, we have reached a very good level! Now what seems to be missing in the next versions Plasma would be precisely the new Software breeze, as had been discussed long ago! Now I know that the developers are very busy on the "Core" bugfixing, Wayland, etc., but I was wondering at what point is the idea of ​​software Breeze, which in the past have seen some nice mockup (photos, Bangarang, Calendar etc.), perhaps you work behind the scenes, or perhaps there is not enough developers for this?
Final thoughts on the program of Music:
I read the blog of a developer who is doing porting Amarok QT5, and he explained how to port these programs FOSE very complex, so I wondered if in some cases it is better to port a complicated program that requires very better or if it is better to start from scratch with the same team with a simpler program and code cleaner and more modern design, you have opinions?

lazyit wrote:I read the blog of a developer who is doing porting Amarok QT5, and he explained how to port these programs FOSE very complex, so I wondered if in some cases it is better to port a complicated program that requires very better or if it is better to start from scratch with the same team with a simpler program and code cleaner and more modern design, you have opinions?

Can you give the link of the blog? Because I think it's me or Aroonav.... And well... I agree with you.

ochurlaud wrote:

lazyit wrote:I read the blog of a developer who is doing porting Amarok QT5, and he explained how to port these programs FOSE very complex, so I wondered if in some cases it is better to port a complicated program that requires very better or if it is better to start from scratch with the same team with a simpler program and code cleaner and more modern design, you have opinions?

Can you give the link of the blog? Because I think it's me or Aroonav.... And well... I agree with you.

http://blogs.churlaud.com/somefoobar/20 ... tching-up/

lazyit wrote:

ochurlaud wrote:

lazyit wrote:I read the blog of a developer who is doing porting Amarok QT5, and he explained how to port these programs FOSE very complex, so I wondered if in some cases it is better to port a complicated program that requires very better or if it is better to start from scratch with the same team with a simpler program and code cleaner and more modern design, you have opinions?

Can you give the link of the blog? Because I think it's me or Aroonav.... And well... I agree with you.

http://blogs.churlaud.com/somefoobar/20 ... tching-up/

I think you have very good readings, and I would completely trust this guy

I'm beginning a simple version of collection "just to see", full QML.

Hi,

I'm thinking of how to structure the collection. I really love the mockup given at the beginning of the forum, but I don't think the structure is good enough for a music player AND collection (as the discussion showed that the collection manager is also important).

First idea I have. On the right, if you click on Playlists, it opens a treeview of playlists, if you re-click it close it. The same with the currently playing and infos (for the infos of the selected track)


Second idea I have. But it looks a lot like Amarok/Clementine


It's really simple things, now my question: is it good? Or too complex?

Well any feedback is welcomed.

Again: it's just about the design. I'm really in favour of using libvlc (and to clear the issue with some countries) and to only build a collection manager. I think the database organization is pretty easy, and we might also think about creating a standard about this. So that then every new player is compatible with the database. What do you think?

hi ochurlaud,

as we also need an music player for mobile to and we have very well defined HIG's for mobile and the view-per-coloumn approach which is cool for phone and desktop.

left panel: navigation part
1. column: folder, collection, playlists, internet, ...
2. column: subfolder, genre, album, artist, ....
3. column: collection grouped by 2 with different views (detail, icon, ...)

central area: play now and playlist area

right panel: more area (additional information, edit area, other stuff)

https://techbase.kde.org/Projects/Usability/HIG

Well, I'm not sure what it would look like (it's definitely not the same as what was presented at the introduction of this thread).

I'm not sure if it is going to be a good experience on computers.....
Now it also can be that I didn't get it right.

The problem I have is that I don't get how your mockup is working. What happens when you do what. What is in the middle column when you click on "Artists"? on "Albums"?

etc...

It seems everything has already been defined. If so, the exact explanations should be given, so that we can begin to do some simple examples and see what can be done. (and for me also to really know if I'm interested in contributing).

If everything is not set, then answer based on what I tried to propose, so that we can go, all together, in the same direction.

Cheers

alake wrote:Ok, so here's where the design is for the moment.


In "party-mode" the playback controls bar would slide down:

sorry ochurlaud I don't want to confuse you. you are very welcome and nothing is defined excluding the two mockups. And you have right the mockups are much better than what I wrote three posts before. In my point of view we can leave the overall layout as it is in the mockups and can discuss the features for each of the single elements.