[mythtv-users] if (x!=rerun) {record}

[Dave Sherohman]

On Fri, Oct 21, 2005 at 12:30:13PM -0700, Bruce Markey wrote:
> Derek Battams wrote:
> >Quoting Bruce Markey <bjm at lvcm.com>:
> >>Note: the rule for new episodes has to take precedence. The more
> >>specific type wins (Single beats Channel beats All) but in this
> >>case they are both All. Therefore the rule for new episodes needs
> >>to be created first to win the tie breaker for older rule. See:
> >>http://www.mythtv.org/docs/mythtv-HOWTO-11.html#ss11.7 the last
> >>item under "Scheduling decisions".
> >
> >More for my own knowledge and understanding, but doesn't the assigned 
> >priority (-1 for syndication and +2 for new episodes) ensure that these 
> >rules will never tie?  Therefore, it doesn't really matter which order 
> >you add them, even though doing it this way certainly won't hurt.
> 
> There are two different issues. There is the normal question of
> which of two different titles has higher priority and thus which
> title gets recorded. However, in this case we have two rules that
> match the same showing of the same title. Here the question is
> which rule controls that showing.
> 
> For instance, say you have an All rule for a favorite show with +6.
> Due to circumstance you want it to record on card 2 tonight and can
> do so by lowering the priority to -2 so you add an override. If
> the controlling rule was chosen by priority, the override would lose.
> An override applies to a single showing of a program that is also
> controlled by a recurring rule. The override must always win precedence
> in order to work. The same would be true if you set a kWeekslotRecord
> rule for one showing where you knew the time was always off by a few
> minutes and a kChannelRecord for all other showings. The weekslot
> rule needs to control that specific day and time over the more general
> rule regardless of any of the recording parameters.
> 
> In the code, this decision is made by RecTypePriority().

Great examples for why a more specific rule should always win over a
less specific rule, but, when both are equally-specific, it would
seem reasonable to go to priority as the next determinant rather than
when the rule was created, if for no other reason than because, if
you want to be sure which one takes precedence, priority is visible
in the interface and 'date rule created' is not.  (Not to mention
that, if the wrong one has precedence, it's easier to change its
priority than it is to delete and recreate rules so that they're in
the right order.  And it would be more consistent to boot. (Priority
controls precedence of rules between different shows but not the same
show?  Huh?)  Priority is better from a standpoint of clarity as
well, since anyone can see that higher-priority beats lower-priority,
but if you just say it's decided on date, then it's unclear whether
newer or older should win - and some of us would expect newer to win,
for much the same reason as we would expect overrides to win over the
general rule.)

*phew*  OK, I think I'm out of reasons why I think it should go to
priority after specificity instead of to rule age.  So why was it set
up to go by age instead?

-- 
The freedoms that we enjoy presently are the most important victories of the
White Hats over the past several millennia, and it is vitally important that
we don't give them up now, only because we are frightened.
  - Eolake Stobblehouse (http://stobblehouse.com/text/battle.html)