[mythtv] mythtv commit: r10570 by bjm

[John P Poet]

On 7/18/06, David Engel <gigem at comcast.net> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 05:33:14PM -0700, Bruce Markey wrote:
> > mysql> select programid,showtype,partnumber from program where programid like "SH%" and partnumber > 1 order by programid;
> > +--------------+----------+------------+
> > | programid    | showtype | partnumber |
> > +--------------+----------+------------+
> > | SH1367680000 | Special  |          2 |
> > +--------------+----------+------------+
> > 1 row in set (0.00 sec)
>
> Let's look a little closer at this one.
>
> mysql> select distinct programid,seriesid,showtype,partnumber,parttotal from program where partnumber > 0 and programid like '%0000' and  seriesid > '';
> +--------------+----------+----------+------------+-----------+
> | programid    | seriesid | showtype | partnumber | parttotal |
> +--------------+----------+----------+------------+-----------+
> | SH1367680000 | SH136768 | Special  |          1 |         2 |
> | SH1367680000 | SH136768 | Special  |          2 |         2 |
> +--------------+----------+----------+------------+-----------+
> 2 rows in set (0.00 sec)
>
> It looks to me like TMS botched this one.  There is a seriesid,
> meaning there could be unique programids for the different episodes.
> These particular episode end in '0000', meaning they should be
> generics.  That can't be right, though, since they have part number
> information which wouldn't be there for a true generic.
>
> In these limited cases where partnumber > 0, seriesid <> '' and
> programid like '%0000', I think there might be a case for, at least
> optionally, munging the programids.  Then again, this might be a rare
> enough case that it's not worth worring about.
>
> Regardless, we should probably do a better job of indicating when
> someghing is split into multiple parts.  I beleive the only place to
> currently see that is on the details screen.  Perhaps we should add it
> wherever desctiptions are shown.
>
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 07:05:12PM -0600, John P Poet wrote:
> > I asked David if he preferred putting code to solve this at the "Data
> > Direct" level, or the scheduling level, and he said he preferred the
> > "Data Direct" level....
>
> IIRC, the original case you cited was similar to the one above.

Possibly.

>  I believe I also said I would defer to Bruce on the matter.

True.


> David


Thanks David,

John