Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

visibility in add-on views #11

Closed
jeroenpardon opened this issue Apr 9, 2014 · 4 comments · Fixed by #12
Closed

visibility in add-on views #11

jeroenpardon opened this issue Apr 9, 2014 · 4 comments · Fixed by #12

Comments

@jeroenpardon
Copy link

Got this question in my skin's forum thread:

On a fresh install of Gotham Beta 3, when I tried to install reFocus, I got the 'dependencies not met' error.

Following the previous post I install the service.library.data.provider plugin, which made reFocus happy.

Problem is, now the Service Library Data Provider plugin appears in both my Video Add-Ons and Music Add-Ons views, which is less than ideal as it's not a plugin you can do anything with, and will just confuse my wife and kids!

Is this caused by the splitting of service and plugin elements? Would there be any way around not showing the plugin in the libraries, as the end-user can't do anything with it ?

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Apr 9, 2014

Jeroen, can you please try my fork at https://github.com/unfledged/service.library.data.provider/ to confirm that the fix (removing the provides tag from the plugin entry point in addon.xml) I've applied still allows you to access the plugin in the library view via a link (as you requested http://forum.xbmc.org/showthread.php?tid=176864&pid=1672381#pid1672381.)

@jeroenpardon
Copy link
Author

I gave it a quick test, and all seems good 👍 The ".." entry opens the various nodes provided by the script, which is nice. The add-on remained visible in the add-on views at first, I had to remove it from xbmc/addons/packages but that's no problem.
I'll do some more checks tonight and report back, thanks a lot for the quick response!

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Apr 9, 2014

It's such a small change it shouldn't need any more testing than that - I just wanted to ensure it didn't regress the direct link to the video library (which was the point of splitting the service and plugin). As it doesn't, I'll go ahead an issue a pull request.

@jeroenpardon
Copy link
Author

Great, thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant