[mythtv] Video Sources - time to call them what they are?

[Stanley Merkx]

> DISAFAN wrote:
>> I think you should simplify it to "Data Sources" It is only a one word
>> change, and is easy to interpret.
>>
>>
>>>> So, I'm proposing that 'Video Sources' are renamed 'TV Guide data
>>>> sources' or something similar.
>>>>
> Forget I ever said anything.  I give up.  There are obviously too many
> variants of what individuals call 'logic' going on here so I'll put it
> back under its rock where it obviously belongs.


After following this thread from the start I can understand your feeling.

But, as a long-time MythTV user (from .16 or so, cannot even remember) and
follower of the -dev list, sometimes jumping from -released/-fixes to
-trunk to use or test specific features I really wanted (such as the
telnet interface), I recently ran into exactly the type of confusion you
are trying to avoid...

Having used 2 ivtv cards for my cable-signal, I've recently started to
move to DVB-S.

I thought I understood the way MythTV works, but after playing with my new
DVB-S card for a couple of hours I completely lost it......

It was relatively simple to use the (stream-provided) EIT data for the
guide data, but as this guide-data covers at most only a few days and
MythTV works sooo much better when it can look forward and resolve
conflicts by re-scheduling recordings based on possible future repeats, I
really needed to configure something better than using only the
stream-provided EIT data.

As my new card(s) could not receive all channels I could previously
receive, but could could also receive so many more, it took a few moments
before I realised that this meant I had to have a closer look at the
'videosources' I had available.

And even after (partially) understanding what is going on, I now have a
configuration in which I have created a video source 'Astra 28.2' which is
coupled to the xmltv grabber 'tv_grab_uk_rt' which provides very good data
for at least the Uk-oriented channels on Astra 28.2 (which I would
intuitively consider to be a 'video source'), but has no information at
all for any of the other transponders on this same cluster of satellites.

At the moment I am not interested in most of the other available channels
on this input but if I would be, I guess I would need to configure at
least one, but possibly many more 'videosources' for this cluster of
satellites, each with their own grabbers.

However, inituitively I would say that a certain stellar position (eg
Astra 28.2, or diseqc port n) is more fitting as 'video source' than the
specific programming I can receive on one or more transponder.

As for now my current setup is working as I wish, I have not investigated
the implications of having more than one listings provider (or perhaps a
better name would be 'content provider') on a single stellar position, but
I do expect this to become an issue some time in the near future......

So perhaps it would be more desirable to link one or more sat/transponder
combinations to one or more 'content providers' and a 'content provider'
should actually be a 'listings source' (either XMLTV or EIT)?

I don't know, just some observations based on some recent experiences of
a(n) (experienced) MythTV user........

Regards,
Stanley.