Re: "My Playlists" Tree Item in Browser

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 11:36:29 +0000, Robert Hart <[email protected]> 
wrote:

> On Sat, 2004-01-31 at 01:58, David Hough wrote:
>
>> Anyway, has anyone got any objections to this, or any suggestions/ideas?
>
> I suppose the default could be a playlists directory within the .zinf
> folder. That should avoid any problems with names clashing.
>
> Sounds good to me.

O.K. I've almost finished the code for this now. You can set which 
directory to display in the preferences (defaults to ~/.zinf/playlists), 
and when saving a playlist the dialog has a combo with the current 
existing groups (sub directories) which you can type a new group into. It 
then creates a new directory and stores the playlist in there.

There is however one major problem with it still, it dosen't resolve the 
"~" part of the directory preference, so you end up with it looking in a 
sub dirctory of your current dir called "~" instead of looking in your 
home directory. So for the moment make sure your preferences have an 
absolute path for the dir if you want this to work.

I think this is something to do with the FilePathtoURL and ResolvePath 
functions in utilties.cpp but I'm not sure of the best way to fix this. 
Also, it looks like someone commented out some code that supposedly did 
this in ResolvePath, are there some portability issues or something with 
this? or was the code just never replaced?

All the code is uploaded in my archive, 
[email protected]/zinf--mdb--0.3
http://www-student.cs.york.ac.uk/~djh123/zinf/arch2004/

> Did we ever talking about ditching the "watch directory for music"
> feature. I remember discovering it was the cause of some unexplained
> crashes, but I don't think we ever fixed it.

Just a thought, but wouldn't this entire feature have to be rewritten 
anyway to work with the new musicdb? Hopefully a rewrite would fix any 
underlying problems with this. Personally, I like the "watch directory for 
music" feature as it means I hardly ever have to tell zinf to rescan my 
files, so it should be kept if at all possible.

>> Sorry if anyone is getting this twice, but the original I sent looks to
>> have dissapeared into the great unknown
>
> Both messages seem to have turned up at the same time. Maybe the first
> one got lost and the second one found it along the way?

Probably rescued it from the annoying clutches of a sourceforge mail server

David
-- 
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/


-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004
Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration
See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA.
http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn