You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hi, I'm the maintainer of Foreseerr, which is a fork of Seerr I've been working on mainly because there were several discovery features I personally wanted to use.
I wanted to ask about this directly because honestly, I'd prefer not having a separate fork if these features are something Seerr would be interested in maintaining upstream.
When I started Foreseerr, my impression from some older issues/discussions was that Seerr was fairly conservative about adding integrations like Trakt and expanding discovery too much. I also wanted to iterate pretty quickly instead of opening an issue and waiting for discussion/approval before trying each idea, so creating a fork made more sense to me at the time.
Since then it grew a bit more than I originally expected. I've added several fairly large features around Trakt, discovery, library browsing, ratings, filters/sliders, etc.
I also want to be transparent that I use AI heavily while developing Foreseerr. I decide/design the features and review/test the changes, but a lot of the implementation is AI-assisted. This is another reason I wasn't sure how suitable large PRs from the fork would be for Seerr.
That said, I'm completely open to upstreaming this work.
If the maintainers are interested, I'd be happy to separate the useful parts into smaller/reviewable PRs and adapt them to whatever direction/standards Seerr wants. I don't expect anyone to just merge the Foreseerr diff as-is.
Foreseerr wasn't created because I wanted to compete with Seerr or maintain another 90% identical application. I basically wanted these features for my own setup, implemented them, and then shared the fork because keeping it only for myself seemed like a waste.
So mainly I'm trying to understand:
Are these kinds of discovery/Trakt features something Seerr would be interested in upstream?
Would PRs for them be welcome?
If yes, is there a preferred way you would want me to split/approach them?
If most/all of this could eventually live in Seerr, I'd actually be pretty happy for Foreseerr to become unnecessary.
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Hi, I'm the maintainer of Foreseerr, which is a fork of Seerr I've been working on mainly because there were several discovery features I personally wanted to use.
I wanted to ask about this directly because honestly, I'd prefer not having a separate fork if these features are something Seerr would be interested in maintaining upstream.
When I started Foreseerr, my impression from some older issues/discussions was that Seerr was fairly conservative about adding integrations like Trakt and expanding discovery too much. I also wanted to iterate pretty quickly instead of opening an issue and waiting for discussion/approval before trying each idea, so creating a fork made more sense to me at the time.
Since then it grew a bit more than I originally expected. I've added several fairly large features around Trakt, discovery, library browsing, ratings, filters/sliders, etc.
I also want to be transparent that I use AI heavily while developing Foreseerr. I decide/design the features and review/test the changes, but a lot of the implementation is AI-assisted. This is another reason I wasn't sure how suitable large PRs from the fork would be for Seerr.
That said, I'm completely open to upstreaming this work.
If the maintainers are interested, I'd be happy to separate the useful parts into smaller/reviewable PRs and adapt them to whatever direction/standards Seerr wants. I don't expect anyone to just merge the Foreseerr diff as-is.
Foreseerr wasn't created because I wanted to compete with Seerr or maintain another 90% identical application. I basically wanted these features for my own setup, implemented them, and then shared the fork because keeping it only for myself seemed like a waste.
So mainly I'm trying to understand:
If most/all of this could eventually live in Seerr, I'd actually be pretty happy for Foreseerr to become unnecessary.
All reactions