[mythtv-users] mythtv/master commit: 53cf459f3 by David Engel (gigem)

[David Engel]

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 03:22:35PM +1000, blind_Pete wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Jun 2011, David Engel wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 06:07:55PM -0700, Yeechang Lee wrote:
> > > David Engel <david at istwok.net> says:
> > > > Would you rather have a fully padded recording of a lower
> > > > priority showing or a less/un- padded recording of a higher priority
> > > > showing?
> 
> Are you asking what priority to assign to the soft padding at either 
> end of a program?  I would assume negative maxint, unless you want 
> to make it user configurable.  

No.  It was entirely rhetorical trying to feflect the fact that the
scheduler has to balance several competing goals.  Furthermore,
experience has shown me that whatever the scheduler does, someon will
be unhappy.

> > > Higher priority; for me, that's the whole point of higher
> > > priority. Soft padding has always been for me something's that's nice
> > > to have for a recording when possible, but if I *need* padding hard
> > > padding is always available.
> 
> It took me a while to realise that there is a choice of padding methods, 
> but having a choice is good.  

Some choice is good.  Too much choice is bad.  There are many who
would argue we already have too much choice.

> > That's exactly how I feel, but I suspect at least some of our friends
> > in Oz probably prefer the full padding due to their networks'
> > inability to tell time.
> 
> Sadly, the solution seems to be, buy more tuners.  

Yes.

David
-- 
David Engel
david at istwok.net