[mythtv] [mythtv-commits] mythtv commit: r24980 by robertm

[Robert McNamara]

On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Jeremy Palenchar <jeremy at palenchar.net> wrote:
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mythtv-dev-bounces at mythtv.org [mailto:mythtv-dev-bounces at mythtv.org]
> On Behalf Of Scott Russell
> Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 11:22 AM
> To: Development of mythtv
> Subject: Re: [mythtv] [mythtv-commits] mythtv commit: r24980 by robertm
>
>
> On Jun 7, 2010, at 1:04 PM, ryan patterson wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Robert McNamara
>> <robert.mcnamara at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I am unlikely to ever support an option to go back trough and
>>> re-re-re-grab metadata from our sources.  It's disrespectful and
>>> unfair to constantly be pulling the same metadata over and over.  I
>>> personally feel like it's selfish and unfair to the unpaid, free data
>>> sources we use. . .
>>>
>>> Robert
>>
>> I don't entirely disagree with your position.
>>
>> In my case I was usually grabbing new metadata that I had added to
>> themoviedb.org.  So I wasn't just hammering their servers over and
>> over.  But that would be the result of an automated "check for new
>> metadata" job.
>>
>
> And it should support partial metadata. Often all the data isn't needed,
> just the missing art, description, etc. Having to clear the entry and then
> grab new data just to check if partial data is now present isn't exactly
> friendly to the end user or the services.
>
> -- Scott
> The metadata source could publish an update number every time you pull. This
> number gets incremented every time the metadata changes in the DB.
>
> The grabber could say "give me updates since this update number."
>
> -J

<Fixed top posting>

We don't run the metadata services.  We are consumers of their data.
As such, we have a responsibility to be *good* consumers of their
data.  They could do lots of things, but the reality is since no such
service exists, the onus is on us to use the data provided in the most
responsible available way.  Given that, the new metadata update
mechanism is what I personally feel comfortable with, and represents a
huge convenience and functionality leap over the old.  If one wants to
be "bad" user of the data, they can mark things as unprocessed and
mass update to their hearts content.  I get the distinct impression
that nobody complaining has even tried it yet.

Robert