[mythtv] [patch] VideoOut Aspect Override Options

Kenneth Aafl°y lists at kenneth.aafloy.net
Sat Jul 3 20:48:44 EDT 2004


On Sunday 04 July 2004 02:28, you wrote:
> Kenneth Aafl°y wrote:
> >On Sunday 04 July 2004 01:32, J. Donavan Stanley wrote:
> >>There was some talk about possibly leveraging the code I wrote for the
> >>advanced recording screen to do away with the Qt based setup screens but
> >>I've not explored it beyond the "yeah it could be done" stage.
> >
> >I have not even had time to even look at the 'beyond the foreground' of
> > the new recording screen, but I must say that it was a relief to use and
> > that I was stumped to find this not beeing the only screen, but still the
> > entry level basic screen is present. What is up with that? I distinctly
> > recall you stating that you would have a screen that would eliminate the
> > split of the recording screens (and I agree), but why was this not
> > followed through?
>
> It's not really my call to make.  What it really boils down to is: "Is
> the new 'advanced' screen simple enough to be the basic screen?"  Since
> I always used the advanced screen I'm not qualified to make that decision.

Yes, it really is, it would require a few more button presses, but, yes, it's 
simple and clear, once you get into how it works, which takes about 20 
seconds of try and err, so everyone should be satisfied, even those that does 
not read documentation, like me :)

> >Anyways, I'll try to push in a slot for looking over this code you wrote,
> > but at the moment I'm trying to prepare a new release of my experimental
> > patch.
>
> It's very similar to the way the settings used to work.  They're just in
> a different container now.

Ahh, lovely, but I'm a bit concerned that the globalsettings object is getting 
very large now, almost 4MB (1.7MB stripped) here. I wonder if there would be 
any method of reducing this size without touching the interface too much?

> >>At any rate they'd need regrouped regardless...  As I recall last time,
> >>the only major complaints were that there were too many top level setup
> >>sections...
> >
> >I'd say that more top level groups would be better than options burried in
> >8-10 level deep options screens, which contains what? 45-60 options, now
> > that is definatly confusing. I find myself lost in there myself, trying
> > to find a option I know is there, but not sure of where.
>
> It's finding the happy balance that's the trick.  80 top level items of
> one screen each is just as bad as 10 with 8 pages each IMO.  Things that
> belong together should be in the same top level item but right now
> things are grouped if they even remotely connect which results in too
> many pages, and things not being where you expect them to be.

Yes, this is exactly my point, really. The clue should be to group closely 
similar options together in it's own group, so that it would be easy to 
resolve (for the user) that option x would be under the path x/y/z. The 
question really is what to put where..I guess I could start that topic, but 
not right now. Way to late for me :)

I also included Isaac in the CC list, and Donavan, please note that I CC about 
ever post I reply to on the MythTV lists so we walk around the roundtrip 
delay of the servers, and can have a snappy conversation, providing all 
members are present.

Kenneth


More information about the mythtv-dev mailing list