[mythtv] Re: Scheduler behavior, why?
jdc at uwo.ca
Sat Feb 12 21:51:10 UTC 2005
Bruce Markey <bjm at lvcm.com> writes:
> This is the (understandable) point of confusion. You presume that
> because you didn't specify, there is no issue of what should get
> first dibs. What if you had two cards, three shows and no later
> showings? One of them has to lose and it has to be deterministic.
Right. If one of them has a later showing, that seems like a
reasonable way to decide, since they are otherwise tied. I believe
this should be the default behaviour, as this will "do the right
thing". (If someone doesn't like what myth does, they use priorities
to give it the information it needs.)
In the case where the show that would be delayed has higher priority,
it is less clear whether the user would want this to happen. So it
makes sense that this case is controlled by a user option.
In other words, I'm arguing that rescheduling should always be done
for equal priorities, and that the "higher priorities" option should
only come into play when a, ahem, higher priority show would be
More information about the mythtv-dev