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

[estuary] another sync, misc fixes / additions #10646

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Oct 7, 2016

Conversation

@phil65
Copy link
Member

commented Oct 7, 2016

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<window>
<defaultcontrol>1000</defaultcontrol>
<defaultcontrol>996</defaultcontrol>

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@ronie

ronie Oct 7, 2016

Member

no objection, just wandering if there's any benefit?
if so, i could notify others to change this in their skins as well.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@phil65

phil65 Oct 7, 2016

Author Member

no real hard reason, but I think it makes more sense to put focus on the grouplist instead of a button template?

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@phil65

phil65 Oct 7, 2016

Author Member

The "real" buttons start with 1001 (see

#define BUTTON_START 1001
), so i think 1000 doesnt make too much sense here.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@phil65

phil65 Oct 7, 2016

Author Member

in fact 1000 gets disabled:

// disable the template button control

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@ronie

ronie Oct 7, 2016

Member

thx!

@ronie

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Oct 7, 2016

looking good

@ronie ronie merged commit 87fabf2 into xbmc:master Oct 7, 2016
0 of 2 checks passed
0 of 2 checks passed
continuous-integration/appveyor/pr Waiting for AppVeyor build to complete
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build is in progress
Details
@MilhouseVH

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Oct 9, 2016

Are the changes to Wall and Infowall views intentional? I (and others) preferred the original more compact layouts...

Here's Wall:

Before:
s1

After:
s2

And InfoWall:

Before:
s3

After:
s4

@phil65

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Oct 9, 2016

yup, change was made because now it supports thumbs with non-poster format (was requested several times on forums and makes sense for a default skin imo)
not happy with it? i might tweak it a bit more.

@MilhouseVH

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Oct 9, 2016

Personally I preferred the more compact look as all of my thumbs are posters. Now, it just looks a lot less neat with so much wasted space.

However as it's intentional I guess the discussion should continue in the Estuary forum - I'll make a post and then you can gauge the feedback.

@phil65

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Oct 9, 2016

ok, cool.

@phil65

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Oct 9, 2016

I changed wall now to the layout used by infowall:
screenshot035
...and i might remove the year label since it looks a bit messy i think.

This is the corresponding confluence layout which gets "replaced".
screenshot033

Tbh I would also prefer a just-poster view, but i think this here works better when takin plugins, alternate scrapers etc into account.

@MilhouseVH

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Oct 9, 2016

OK, if you've changed it already there's no point me posting the current (new) look on the forum (I was in the process of uploading the old/new look to an imgur gallery, and failing!), but I do think this may need wider discussion before committing to these changes - I don't really see the point of adding the extra text below the thumbs in these Wall/InfoWall views, as to me a "Wall" view should just be about the artwork, with as much artwork visible as possible. Having to support non-poster thumbs now means that the majority of artwork (typically posters) is now surrounded by blank space. If there's a need to support non-poster artwork then maybe it should be done with a new/extra view?

The revised Wall view is better, but that text... hmmm. :)

@ghost

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Oct 9, 2016

Can we get the old Wall view back? For me the new look is terrible.. No need for that Background and text. Make it optional ;)

@zag2me

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Oct 10, 2016

Just adding my support to removing the year from title. It is unnecessary on that view.

@redglory

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Oct 23, 2016

+1 for previous wall and infowall versions

@Cocotus

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Nov 5, 2016

+1 for previous poster only option please!

@xbmc xbmc locked and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 5, 2016
@phil65 phil65 deleted the phil65:estuary_updates branch Dec 15, 2016
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
7 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.