Mailing List Archive

Holy porno coverart batman!
Just got around to checking how the metadatalookup is performing on
0.27 and noticed this dangerous (for me) situation. The TV program
"You've been framed!" has a tvdb number of 71560 and has nice artwork
at http://thetvdb.com/?tab=series&id=71560&lid=7.

Imagine my surprise when I found that mythmetadatalookup had
downloaded from http://www.themoviedb.org/movie/71560 (NSFW)

Luckily there's only a scan of the dvd cover there and no screenshots!

My question is how do you get mythmetadatalookup to chose between
themoviedb.org and thetvdb.org?

I think I may have fixed this one by going to the recording rules in
the frontend and in the metadata screen setting the series to 1 but
I'm not sure if this is the correct way or if it will stick. There
doesn't seem to be anything in mythweb to help.

This is a power search if that makes any difference. I couldn't see
anything else in the record table to give a hint.

Cheers,
Tim.


_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On 03.10.2013 14:24, mythtv@phipps-hutton.freeserve.co.uk wrote:
> Just got around to checking how the metadatalookup is performing on 0.27
> and noticed this dangerous (for me) situation. The TV program "You've
> been framed!" has a tvdb number of 71560 and has nice artwork at
> http://thetvdb.com/?tab=series&id=71560&lid=7.
>
> Imagine my surprise when I found that mythmetadatalookup had downloaded
> from http://www.themoviedb.org/movie/71560 (NSFW)
>
> Luckily there's only a scan of the dvd cover there and no screenshots!

Lucky you, my SO was not amused when that happened to her Mentalist
recordings...

> My question is how do you get mythmetadatalookup to chose between
> themoviedb.org and thetvdb.org?
>
> I think I may have fixed this one by going to the recording rules in the
> frontend and in the metadata screen setting the series to 1 but I'm not
> sure if this is the correct way or if it will stick. There doesn't seem
> to be anything in mythweb to help.

IIRC setting the series/episode to something not 0 works. At least thats
how it was designed back then. As I've not seen interesting fanart in a
long time it seems to stick.

Regards,
Karl
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 8:33 AM, Karl Dietz <dekarl@spaetfruehstuecken.org>wrote:

> Lucky you, my SO was not amused when that happened to her Mentalist
> recordings...



I'm assuming many of us checked that out. Egads...I can see the shock when
your SO was expecting a picture of Simon Baker and got the lass in
question. I guess it says a lot about the people contributing to the
themoviedb when some classic films have no artwork but a porno has multiple
backgrounds and covers.
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Ian Evans <dheianevans@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 8:33 AM, Karl Dietz <dekarl@spaetfruehstuecken.org>
> wrote:
>>
>> Lucky you, my SO was not amused when that happened to her Mentalist
>> recordings...
>
> I'm assuming many of us checked that out. Egads...I can see the shock when
> your SO was expecting a picture of Simon Baker and got the lass in question.
> I guess it says a lot about the people contributing to the themoviedb when
> some classic films have no artwork but a porno has multiple backgrounds and
> covers.

Well, regardless of the nature of the content, it seems like mixing up
an id from one database with an id in another database is a bug that
needs to be addressed.

Has anyone filed a ticket?

Eric
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 04:26:09PM -0400, Eric Sharkey wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Ian Evans <dheianevans@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 8:33 AM, Karl Dietz <dekarl@spaetfruehstuecken.org>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Lucky you, my SO was not amused when that happened to her Mentalist
> >> recordings...
> >
> > I'm assuming many of us checked that out. Egads...I can see the shock when
> > your SO was expecting a picture of Simon Baker and got the lass in question.
> > I guess it says a lot about the people contributing to the themoviedb when
> > some classic films have no artwork but a porno has multiple backgrounds and
> > covers.
>
> Well, regardless of the nature of the content, it seems like mixing up
> an id from one database with an id in another database is a bug that
> needs to be addressed.

I dunno. The whole "inappropriate content" thing seems to be a bigger problem.
This seems like something that should be governed by ratings controls if it were a
recording or video0. The possibility that metadata also needs to be managed in the
same way is an intriguing development.

Kids could end up seeing this stuff, or more importantly the neighbor's kids
could end up seeing this stuff and throwing a royal conniption fit with serious
consequences.

Superhero parodies spring immediately to mind.
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:39 PM, jedi <jedi@mishnet.org> wrote:
> I dunno. The whole "inappropriate content" thing seems to be a bigger problem.
> This seems like something that should be governed by ratings controls if it were a
> recording or video0. The possibility that metadata also needs to be managed in the
> same way is an intriguing development.

I don't see why you'd want to add that layer of complexity. I don't
see the problem with pornographic metadata if it's correctly matched
up with the content. If the content is hidden, the metadata should
be, too, and vice versa.

In other words, if metadata and content wasn't mismatched, this
wouldn't be an issue (of course, ignoring cases where this happens due
to deliberate vandalism, but I don't know what could be done about
that).

Eric
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
> On 4 Oct 2013, at 6:17 am, "Eric Sharkey" <eric@lisaneric.org> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:39 PM, jedi <jedi@mishnet.org> wrote:
>> I dunno. The whole "inappropriate content" thing seems to be a bigger problem.
>> This seems like something that should be governed by ratings controls if it were a
>> recording or video0. The possibility that metadata also needs to be managed in the
>> same way is an intriguing development.
>
> I don't see why you'd want to add that layer of complexity. I don't
> see the problem with pornographic metadata if it's correctly matched
> up with the content. If the content is hidden, the metadata should
> be, too, and vice versa.
>
> In other words, if metadata and content wasn't mismatched, this
> wouldn't be an issue (of course, ignoring cases where this happens due
> to deliberate vandalism, but I don't know what could be done about
> that).
>
> Eric
> _______________________________________________
[Mark] I think it's been suggested before and it is probably the simplest solution "IF" you could get the people behind TVDB / TMDB to agree - get them to use index references that are unique between the two databases (maybe just a prefix or suffix T / M for simplicity). Seems to me it (unique ref) would make a lot of sense given the two databases are perhaps just two halves of a larger 'video' database and are going to be used in very close proximity in many circumstances...
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On 10/3/2013 4:39 PM, jedi wrote:
> I dunno. The whole "inappropriate content" thing seems to be a bigger problem.
> This seems like something that should be governed by ratings controls if it were a
> recording or video0. The possibility that metadata also needs to be managed in the
> same way is an intriguing development.

This content is actually automatically filtered out of the TMDB search
function automatically. This is actually something that will need to be
resolved by putting an option in the grabber to not filter such results,
if users want to intentionally pull metadata for such content. The
issue is that the application searched using TTVDB, and then for some
reason switched and pulled data for that result from TMDB.
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On 10/3/2013 4:26 PM, Eric Sharkey wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Ian Evans <dheianevans@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 8:33 AM, Karl Dietz <dekarl@spaetfruehstuecken.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Lucky you, my SO was not amused when that happened to her Mentalist
>>> recordings...
>>
>> I'm assuming many of us checked that out. Egads...I can see the shock when
>> your SO was expecting a picture of Simon Baker and got the lass in question.
>> I guess it says a lot about the people contributing to the themoviedb when
>> some classic films have no artwork but a porno has multiple backgrounds and
>> covers.
>
> Well, regardless of the nature of the content, it seems like mixing up
> an id from one database with an id in another database is a bug that
> needs to be addressed.

It's something that has come up in the past, and the plan was to prepend
all inetrefs with a tag that identified the grabber to be used with it,
but the plan was forgotten at some point and never implemented.
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On 03.10.2013 22:47, Eric Sharkey wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:39 PM, jedi<jedi@mishnet.org> wrote:
>> I dunno. The whole "inappropriate content" thing seems to be a bigger problem.
>> This seems like something that should be governed by ratings controls if it were a
>> recording or video0. The possibility that metadata also needs to be managed in the
>> same way is an intriguing development.
>
> I don't see why you'd want to add that layer of complexity. I don't
> see the problem with pornographic metadata if it's correctly matched
> up with the content. If the content is hidden, the metadata should
> be, too, and vice versa.
>
> In other words, if metadata and content wasn't mismatched, this
> wouldn't be an issue (of course, ignoring cases where this happens due
> to deliberate vandalism, but I don't know what could be done about
> that).

I went over to IAFD to see their stance on explicit pictures and if the
special purpose database does not show naked pictures of adult actors
or films then its ok for me if the general movie database does not show
them either.

See http://www.themoviedb.org/talk/524e5eda760ee331d5029ddc

Regards,
Karl
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 2:28 AM, Karl Dietz
<dekarl@spaetfruehstuecken.org> wrote:
> I went over to IAFD to see their stance on explicit pictures and if the
> special purpose database does not show naked pictures of adult actors
> or films then its ok for me if the general movie database does not show
> them either.
>
> See http://www.themoviedb.org/talk/524e5eda760ee331d5029ddc

I don't really care what themoviedb's policy is, but when determining
that policy, I don't think it's appropriate to take into account the
fact that the mythtv metadata grabber has a bug in its design.
Getting explicit content off the site won't change the fact that the
wrong metadata will still be fetched.

Eric
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On 04.10.2013 15:16, Eric Sharkey wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 2:28 AM, Karl Dietz
> <dekarl@spaetfruehstuecken.org> wrote:
>> I went over to IAFD to see their stance on explicit pictures and if the
>> special purpose database does not show naked pictures of adult actors
>> or films then its ok for me if the general movie database does not show
>> them either.
>>
>> See http://www.themoviedb.org/talk/524e5eda760ee331d5029ddc
>
> I don't really care what themoviedb's policy is, but when determining
> that policy, I don't think it's appropriate to take into account the
> fact that the mythtv metadata grabber has a bug in its design.
> Getting explicit content off the site won't change the fact that the
> wrong metadata will still be fetched.

I agree with you. My post was worded badly. We should fix our bugs and
tmdb should decide on their policy independently.

Regards,
Karl
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
Le samedi 5 octobre 2013, Karl Dietz a écrit :

> On 04.10.2013 15:16, Eric Sharkey wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 2:28 AM, Karl Dietz
>> <dekarl@spaetfruehstuecken.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I went over to IAFD to see their stance on explicit pictures and if the
>>> special purpose database does not show naked pictures of adult actors
>>> or films then its ok for me if the general movie database does not show
>>> them either.
>>>
>>> See http://www.themoviedb.org/**talk/524e5eda760ee331d5029ddc<http://www.themoviedb.org/talk/524e5eda760ee331d5029ddc>
>>>
>>
>> I don't really care what themoviedb's policy is, but when determining
>> that policy, I don't think it's appropriate to take into account the
>> fact that the mythtv metadata grabber has a bug in its design.
>> Getting explicit content off the site won't change the fact that the
>> wrong metadata will still be fetched.
>>
>
> I agree with you. My post was worded badly. We should fix our bugs and
> tmdb should decide on their policy independently.


The only way to get rid of that issue would be doing what XBMC does: when
you add folders to the video database, you specify if that video contains
movie or TV series.
It goes even further in functionality: you can specify a metadata grabber
for each of the folders added to the library.

So when setting the videos storage group: you set the type of content it
has...
People would have to split their TV content from the movies...
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Jean-Yves Avenard <jyavenard@gmail.com>wrote:

>
>
> Le samedi 5 octobre 2013, Karl Dietz a écrit :
>
> On 04.10.2013 15:16, Eric Sharkey wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 2:28 AM, Karl Dietz
>>> <dekarl@spaetfruehstuecken.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I went over to IAFD to see their stance on explicit pictures and if the
>>>> special purpose database does not show naked pictures of adult actors
>>>> or films then its ok for me if the general movie database does not show
>>>> them either.
>>>>
>>>> See http://www.themoviedb.org/**talk/524e5eda760ee331d5029ddc<http://www.themoviedb.org/talk/524e5eda760ee331d5029ddc>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't really care what themoviedb's policy is, but when determining
>>> that policy, I don't think it's appropriate to take into account the
>>> fact that the mythtv metadata grabber has a bug in its design.
>>> Getting explicit content off the site won't change the fact that the
>>> wrong metadata will still be fetched.
>>>
>>
>> I agree with you. My post was worded badly. We should fix our bugs and
>> tmdb should decide on their policy independently.
>
>
> The only way to get rid of that issue would be doing what XBMC does: when
> you add folders to the video database, you specify if that video contains
> movie or TV series.
> It goes even further in functionality: you can specify a metadata grabber
> for each of the folders added to the library.
>
> So when setting the videos storage group: you set the type of content it
> has...
> People would have to split their TV content from the movies...
>

This problem has come up before on this list, but I can't find the thread,
or recall if there was a definitive solution.
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On 04.10.2013 16:48, jyavenard wrote:

>The only way to get rid of that issue would be doing what XBMC does: when
>you add folders to the video database, you specify if that video contains
>movie or TV series.
>It goes even further in functionality: you can specify a metadata grabber
>for each of the folders added to the library.
>
>So when setting the videos storage group: you set the type of content it
>has...
>People would have to split their TV content from the movies...

There's no need to base the logic on directory structure, we should be
leveraging the CONTENTTYPE column in mythconverg:videometadata. Valid
entries (I believe since 0.25) are:
MOVIE
TELEVISION
ADULT
MUSICVIDEO
HOMEVIDEO

We should be able to use these values to specify which metadata scripts to run.
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Rob Jensen <bertaboy@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 04.10.2013 16:48, jyavenard wrote:
>
> >The only way to get rid of that issue would be doing what XBMC does: when
> >you add folders to the video database, you specify if that video contains
> >movie or TV series.
> >It goes even further in functionality: you can specify a metadata grabber
> >for each of the folders added to the library.
> >
> >So when setting the videos storage group: you set the type of content it
> >has...
> >People would have to split their TV content from the movies...
>
> There's no need to base the logic on directory structure, we should be
> leveraging the CONTENTTYPE column in mythconverg:videometadata. Valid
> entries (I believe since 0.25) are:
> MOVIE
> TELEVISION
> ADULT
> MUSICVIDEO
> HOMEVIDEO
>
> We should be able to use these values to specify which metadata scripts to
> run.
>

And where do you think those values come from?
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 1:15 AM, Nick Rout <nick.rout@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Rob Jensen <bertaboy@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 04.10.2013 16:48, jyavenard wrote:
>>
>> >The only way to get rid of that issue would be doing what XBMC does: when
>> >you add folders to the video database, you specify if that video contains
>> >movie or TV series.
>> >It goes even further in functionality: you can specify a metadata grabber
>> >for each of the folders added to the library.
>> >
>> >So when setting the videos storage group: you set the type of content it
>> >has...
>> >People would have to split their TV content from the movies...
>>
>> There's no need to base the logic on directory structure, we should be
>> leveraging the CONTENTTYPE column in mythconverg:videometadata. Valid
>> entries (I believe since 0.25) are:
>> MOVIE
>> TELEVISION
>> ADULT
>> MUSICVIDEO
>> HOMEVIDEO
>>
>> We should be able to use these values to specify which metadata scripts to
>> run.
>
>
> And where do you think those values come from?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users@mythtv.org
> http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
>

Aliens

Thanks,

Thomas Mashos
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Nick Rout <nick.rout@gmail.com>
> To: Discussion about MythTV <mythtv-users@mythtv.org>
> Cc:
> Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 21:15:26 +1300
> Subject: Re: [mythtv-users] Holy porno coverart batman!
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Rob Jensen <bertaboy@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 04.10.2013 16:48, jyavenard wrote:
>>
>> >The only way to get rid of that issue would be doing what XBMC does: when
>> >you add folders to the video database, you specify if that video contains
>> >movie or TV series.
>> >It goes even further in functionality: you can specify a metadata grabber
>> >for each of the folders added to the library.
>> >
>> >So when setting the videos storage group: you set the type of content it
>> >has...
>> >People would have to split their TV content from the movies...
>>
>> There's no need to base the logic on directory structure, we should be
>> leveraging the CONTENTTYPE column in mythconverg:videometadata. Valid
>> entries (I believe since 0.25) are:
>> MOVIE
>> TELEVISION
>> ADULT
>> MUSICVIDEO
>> HOMEVIDEO
>>
>> We should be able to use these values to specify which metadata scripts to run.
>
>
> And where do you think those values come from?

Is there any reason why we can't populate these when we choose the
appropriate item in the query for metadata? It might require tweaking
the initial metadata search query, but there should be no reason why
we can't indicate whether an entry comes from ttvdb or tmdb in the
select prompt. Selecting from one metadata source then assigns the
video as one of the options above and that assignment then becomes a
dependency for the logic between importing data from ttvdb or tmdb.
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Rob Jensen <bertaboy@gmail.com> wrote:
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Nick Rout <nick.rout@gmail.com>
>> To: Discussion about MythTV <mythtv-users@mythtv.org>
>> Cc:
>> Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 21:15:26 +1300
>> Subject: Re: [mythtv-users] Holy porno coverart batman!
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Rob Jensen <bertaboy@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 04.10.2013 16:48, jyavenard wrote:
>>>
>>> >The only way to get rid of that issue would be doing what XBMC does: when
>>> >you add folders to the video database, you specify if that video contains
>>> >movie or TV series.
>>> >It goes even further in functionality: you can specify a metadata grabber
>>> >for each of the folders added to the library.
>>> >
>>> >So when setting the videos storage group: you set the type of content it
>>> >has...
>>> >People would have to split their TV content from the movies...
>>>
>>> There's no need to base the logic on directory structure, we should be
>>> leveraging the CONTENTTYPE column in mythconverg:videometadata. Valid
>>> entries (I believe since 0.25) are:
>>> MOVIE
>>> TELEVISION
>>> ADULT
>>> MUSICVIDEO
>>> HOMEVIDEO
>>>
>>> We should be able to use these values to specify which metadata scripts to run.
>>
>>
>> And where do you think those values come from?
>
> Is there any reason why we can't populate these when we choose the
> appropriate item in the query for metadata? It might require tweaking
> the initial metadata search query, but there should be no reason why
> we can't indicate whether an entry comes from ttvdb or tmdb in the
> select prompt. Selecting from one metadata source then assigns the
> video as one of the options above and that assignment then becomes a
> dependency for the logic between importing data from ttvdb or tmdb.
> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users@mythtv.org
> http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

That doesn't work very well for mass metadata lookups (eg. when you
hit the scan button and it does a metadatalookup for all new items).

Why can't we just name files appropriately with a SxxExx and that
means it's a TV show? (even accounting for specials and such that
aren't necessarily episodic, we could just use S00E00)

Thanks,

Thomas Mashos
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On 10/09/2013 01:11 PM, Thomas Mashos wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Rob Jensen <bertaboy@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Is there any reason why we can't populate these when we choose the
>> appropriate item in the query for metadata? It might require tweaking
>> the initial metadata search query, but there should be no reason why
>> we can't indicate whether an entry comes from ttvdb or tmdb in the
>> select prompt. Selecting from one metadata source then assigns the
>> video as one of the options above and that assignment then becomes a
>> dependency for the logic between importing data from ttvdb or tmdb.
> That doesn't work very well for mass metadata lookups (eg. when you
> hit the scan button and it does a metadatalookup for all new items).
No, that works perfectly. You do the lookup the way it's done now (or
some other way, it doesn't really matter for this point). When you get
an index number from the external database, you save both the index
number and a tag saying which database. Then any future use of that
index number will be restricted to only use that database, so you won't
get images from the wrong database. One option would be to prepend a
tag for the database to the numbers. Another would be to have a separate
field. I can see advantages to both approaches, and it doesn't really
matter how it's done, as long as it solves the problem.
> Why can't we just name files appropriately with a SxxExx and that
> means it's a TV show? (even accounting for specials and such that
> aren't necessarily episodic, we could just use S00E00)
Relying on how people name their files to avoid mixing up between
databases is crazy. Sure, there are advantages to having files named
correctly, but that doesn't excuse the bug.

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Preston Crow
<pc-mythtv08a@crowcastle.net> wrote:
> On 10/09/2013 01:11 PM, Thomas Mashos wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Rob Jensen <bertaboy@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Is there any reason why we can't populate these when we choose the
>>> appropriate item in the query for metadata? It might require tweaking
>>> the initial metadata search query, but there should be no reason why
>>> we can't indicate whether an entry comes from ttvdb or tmdb in the
>>> select prompt. Selecting from one metadata source then assigns the
>>> video as one of the options above and that assignment then becomes a
>>> dependency for the logic between importing data from ttvdb or tmdb.
>>
>> That doesn't work very well for mass metadata lookups (eg. when you
>>
>> hit the scan button and it does a metadatalookup for all new items).
>
> No, that works perfectly. You do the lookup the way it's done now (or some
> other way, it doesn't really matter for this point). When you get an index
> number from the external database, you save both the index number and a tag
> saying which database. Then any future use of that index number will be
> restricted to only use that database, so you won't get images from the wrong
> database. One option would be to prepend a tag for the database to the
> numbers. Another would be to have a separate field. I can see advantages to
> both approaches, and it doesn't really matter how it's done, as long as it
> solves the problem.
>

No, that doesn't work perfectly. When I do a scan for metadata, I'm
not prompted with a list to pick the correct item, precisely because
my file names and the metadata lookup provide the correct result
without user intervention (ideally, as it should be). Sure there are
one offs, but requiring that for every item would be IMO a bad idea.

And according to a previous poster, there already is a separate field
"the CONTENTTYPE column in mythconverg:videometadata"

>> Why can't we just name files appropriately with a SxxExx and that
>> means it's a TV show? (even accounting for specials and such that
>> aren't necessarily episodic, we could just use S00E00)
>
> Relying on how people name their files to avoid mixing up between databases
> is crazy. Sure, there are advantages to having files named correctly, but
> that doesn't excuse the bug.
>

You're right. It's a good thing we don't tell people to do exactly that.
http://www.mythtv.org/wiki/MythVideo_File_Parsing

I thought the bug in question was where you give it an inetref number
and it gets confused if it's a TV show or video since both databases
use similar numbers.

>
> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users@mythtv.org
> http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


As long as we're giving MythTV developers stuff to do in order to fix
this issue, why not just have a separate storage group for ripped
television shows and ripped movies? MythTV could call the correct
metadata grabber based on which storage group it's in, and it would
also segregate them allowing a future addition of showing ripped TV
shows in the recording screen instead of the video screen.

Thanks,

Thomas Mashos
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 09:15:26PM +1300, Nick Rout wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Rob Jensen <bertaboy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 04.10.2013 16:48, jyavenard wrote:
> >
> > >The only way to get rid of that issue would be doing what XBMC does: when
> > >you add folders to the video database, you specify if that video contains
> > >movie or TV series.
> > >It goes even further in functionality: you can specify a metadata grabber
> > >for each of the folders added to the library.
> > >
> > >So when setting the videos storage group: you set the type of content it
> > >has...
> > >People would have to split their TV content from the movies...
> >
> > There's no need to base the logic on directory structure, we should be
> > leveraging the CONTENTTYPE column in mythconverg:videometadata. Valid
> > entries (I believe since 0.25) are:
> > MOVIE
> > TELEVISION
> > ADULT
> > MUSICVIDEO
> > HOMEVIDEO
> >
> > We should be able to use these values to specify which metadata scripts to
> > run.
> >
>
> And where do you think those values come from?

They should be effectvely set by the end user in a manner similar to XBMC or Plex.

If MythTV is trying to guess at those values, then that's a bad idea.

[deletia]
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On 10/09/2013 01:39 PM, Thomas Mashos wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Preston Crow wrote:
>> On 10/09/2013 01:11 PM, Thomas Mashos wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Rob Jensen <bertaboy@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Is there any reason why we can't populate these when we choose the
>>>> appropriate item in the query for metadata? It might require tweaking
>>>> the initial metadata search query, but there should be no reason why
>>>> we can't indicate whether an entry comes from ttvdb or tmdb in the
>>>> select prompt. Selecting from one metadata source then assigns the
>>>> video as one of the options above and that assignment then becomes a
>>>> dependency for the logic between importing data from ttvdb or tmdb.
>>> That doesn't work very well for mass metadata lookups (eg. when you
>>>
>>> hit the scan button and it does a metadatalookup for all new items).
>> No, that works perfectly. You do the lookup the way it's done now (or some
>> other way, it doesn't really matter for this point). When you get an index
>> number from the external database, you save both the index number and a tag
>> saying which database. Then any future use of that index number will be
>> restricted to only use that database, so you won't get images from the wrong
>> database. One option would be to prepend a tag for the database to the
>> numbers. Another would be to have a separate field. I can see advantages to
>> both approaches, and it doesn't really matter how it's done, as long as it
>> solves the problem.
>>
> No, that doesn't work perfectly. When I do a scan for metadata, I'm
> not prompted with a list to pick the correct item, precisely because
> my file names and the metadata lookup provide the correct result
> without user intervention (ideally, as it should be). Sure there are
> one offs, but requiring that for every item would be IMO a bad idea.
>
> And according to a previous poster, there already is a separate field
> "the CONTENTTYPE column in mythconverg:videometadata"
I think we agree that the scan should proceed without user input,
magically getting most videos right and needing some help on ones that
are named strangely or are just too generic.
>>> Why can't we just name files appropriately with a SxxExx and that
>>> means it's a TV show? (even accounting for specials and such that
>>> aren't necessarily episodic, we could just use S00E00)
>> Relying on how people name their files to avoid mixing up between databases
>> is crazy. Sure, there are advantages to having files named correctly, but
>> that doesn't excuse the bug.
>>
> You're right. It's a good thing we don't tell people to do exactly that.
> http://www.mythtv.org/wiki/MythVideo_File_Parsing
>
> I thought the bug in question was where you give it an inetref number
> and it gets confused if it's a TV show or video since both databases
> use similar numbers.
>
I thought the bug in question was where the number was found by MythTV
at one point, and then at another point it used that number to retrieve
images from a different database from where it had found the number. If
you are correct, and this is an issue of a user having entered the
number, then I would say that this isn't a bug. In that case, the only
thing that needs to be corrected is to tweak the UI when entering a
number to make it obvious how to specify what type of number it is.
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Thomas Mashos <thomas@mashos.com> wrote:
> And according to a previous poster, there already is a separate field
> "the CONTENTTYPE column in mythconverg:videometadata"

Which can only be of help here if there's a one to one mapping between
content type and metadata source. If there's more than one source to
look for metadata for a given content type, you're right back where
you started.

It's much more sensible to store the id and source together,
independent of content type.

Eric
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
Re: Holy porno coverart batman! [ In reply to ]
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Preston Crow
<pc-mythtv08a@crowcastle.net> wrote:
> On 10/09/2013 01:39 PM, Thomas Mashos wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Preston Crow wrote:
>>>
>>> On 10/09/2013 01:11 PM, Thomas Mashos wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Rob Jensen <bertaboy@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there any reason why we can't populate these when we choose the
>>>>> appropriate item in the query for metadata? It might require tweaking
>>>>> the initial metadata search query, but there should be no reason why
>>>>> we can't indicate whether an entry comes from ttvdb or tmdb in the
>>>>> select prompt. Selecting from one metadata source then assigns the
>>>>> video as one of the options above and that assignment then becomes a
>>>>> dependency for the logic between importing data from ttvdb or tmdb.
>>>>
>>>> That doesn't work very well for mass metadata lookups (eg. when you
>>>>
>>>> hit the scan button and it does a metadatalookup for all new items).
>>>
>>> No, that works perfectly. You do the lookup the way it's done now (or
>>> some
>>> other way, it doesn't really matter for this point). When you get an
>>> index
>>> number from the external database, you save both the index number and a
>>> tag
>>> saying which database. Then any future use of that index number will be
>>> restricted to only use that database, so you won't get images from the
>>> wrong
>>> database. One option would be to prepend a tag for the database to the
>>> numbers. Another would be to have a separate field. I can see advantages
>>> to
>>> both approaches, and it doesn't really matter how it's done, as long as
>>> it
>>> solves the problem.
>>>
>> No, that doesn't work perfectly. When I do a scan for metadata, I'm
>> not prompted with a list to pick the correct item, precisely because
>> my file names and the metadata lookup provide the correct result
>> without user intervention (ideally, as it should be). Sure there are
>> one offs, but requiring that for every item would be IMO a bad idea.
>>
>> And according to a previous poster, there already is a separate field
>> "the CONTENTTYPE column in mythconverg:videometadata"
>
> I think we agree that the scan should proceed without user input, magically
> getting most videos right and needing some help on ones that are named
> strangely or are just too generic.
>
>>>> Why can't we just name files appropriately with a SxxExx and that
>>>> means it's a TV show? (even accounting for specials and such that
>>>> aren't necessarily episodic, we could just use S00E00)
>>>
>>> Relying on how people name their files to avoid mixing up between
>>> databases
>>> is crazy. Sure, there are advantages to having files named correctly,
>>> but
>>> that doesn't excuse the bug.
>>>
>> You're right. It's a good thing we don't tell people to do exactly that.
>> http://www.mythtv.org/wiki/MythVideo_File_Parsing
>>
>> I thought the bug in question was where you give it an inetref number
>> and it gets confused if it's a TV show or video since both databases
>> use similar numbers.
>>
> I thought the bug in question was where the number was found by MythTV at
> one point, and then at another point it used that number to retrieve images
> from a different database from where it had found the number. If you are
> correct, and this is an issue of a user having entered the number, then I
> would say that this isn't a bug. In that case, the only thing that needs to
> be corrected is to tweak the UI when entering a number to make it obvious
> how to specify what type of number it is.
>
> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users@mythtv.org
> http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

If what you say is the actual issue, then yes, I would agree that is a bug.


Thanks,

Thomas Mashos
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org
http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

1 2  View All