ADD: "Import All" setting: add all videos to the library, even if there is no scrapper data

[koying]

Problem is that if a scrapper is set but a file match fails, nothing is imported,
so the user has no idea the scrapper failed.

This still imports the file as a generic video.

Use cases:

• Scrapper failed to recognize filename
• Use "dummy show" as category of random files, with just a tvshow.nfo

/cc @Montellese

Note: This is a very old feature in my tree. I incidentally had a user asking for the exact same request, so I now PR it, but I might have difficulties finding back my own logic ;)

[MartijnKaijser]

sorry but i feel this is the wrong way. This was intentionally removed by jmarshallnz long ago. What i certainly don't like is this needing a setting.
We should dump unscannable files in some separate node where the user can see what's missing. Also the new "events" also shows what files were not scanned where you can go fix them.

That only leave home videos

[mkortstiege]

What @MartijnKaijser wrote. I'd prefer a Unscraped Items or similar node where all file unidentified files show up. Adding fake items to the actual media tables is the wrong approach IMO.

[koying]

Fair enough, but how do you get "Unscrapped Items" if they're not in the DB?

[koying]

Let's discuss the proper way to handle those on the internal forum

[NedScott]

What about a middle ground, where someone can manually select a video and add it to the library? There would be no additional settings. You would just try to "get info", it would fail, and you are then given an option to change the search title (as it is now) or manually add it to the library. Then be prompted for basic title info.

I do remember when we had an option like that, and it was removed, but the reason for removing it had to do with how the old method was implemented. A new method was being worked on by @topfs2 (see #1021 ) but it looks like that never came around or didn't include a manual-adding method. In other words, the feature is still welcome, as long as the method is sane.

[NedScott]

ping @Voyager1

[NedScott]

Another thought, could this be a set-content setting? Not really a scraper setting, but in the set-content window, and definable per source.

[koying]

Well, it makes sense.
But I think it's the fact of having non properly scrapped items in the library that makes it a no-go for most

[NedScott]

Since @MartijnKaijser and @mkortstiege like the idea of an "unscaped node", how about automatically tag and filter these "raw" scans out of the normal video nodes, but still add them to the library? Add in a new "unscraped" node, and anyone who wants to mix things can edit their own video nodes.

There has to be a middle ground that is acceptable. It might not be perfect, but something sane. This feature is in big demand, and NFO files are a 90's solution to a modern problem.

[Rechi]

@koying this needs a rebase

[koying]

Abandonned