Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[terrym@tassie]

[Edit by JimH -- This is related to the

NEW:  Active Theater View Templates]


I'm not happy that customizations are being overwritten in the latest releases (32.0.11 & 32.0.12).
It took years getting Theater View the way I LIKE IT.
Can you not merge the new Movie template with the existing customization as an option?
I've worked around the issue by changing the revision number in the template backup file and used this to overwrite the library template file.

[JimH]

If you customize MC's files, there's always a chance you'll lose your work.  So ... back up.

In some cases, custom work can be put in a Custom Resources folder and MC won't touch it.  I don't know about this case.

[cncb]

This was the best option to make sure everyone gets the new stuff without having to do anything manual. 

I will make a change so you can set the version in your templates file to a really high number and not have to worry about it again.

[marko]

I copied the new Movie template into my own xml file. So, in the config tool, I have both templates to play with. How will future updates to the new "Movie" template affect this approach?

[Matt]

The existing templates are backed up to a backup folder under your library.

[terrym@tassie]

I appreciate that the objective of overwriting the file info xml template is to ensure that all users get the new Theater View improvements.

However, I think the way it is being done may cause unnecessary support issues.

Point 1. Restoring a backup from a release lower than 32.0.11 will not return the MC library to its previous state as the file info xml file will be overwritten with defaults again.

Point 2. Users have to find and manipulate xml files to restore their customizations.

I think it would better if the update overwrote the default file info entries in the existing xml file.

This would have the advantage of not overwriting any added or renamed entries (such as My Movies, My TV Show 2021 etc).

It could be made clear in the update notes that the default file info schemes could be overwritten again at any time in the future and users should use their own custom names for their customization schemes.

[JimH]

I moved this from the beta board.

The problem should only affect a small group of dedicated followers of lepa's original tool tip customization thread.   That thread is five years old now!

The topic deserves discussion, but we need to move forward.

If those affected can agree on a better method, we'll consider it.

[lepa]

Why not just merge new "Movie (Spotlight)" on top of the template elements so it will be active template for media sub type movies until manual user intervention? Personally I don't mind a little clean up on my xml file but can see some justified criticism/support req coming from this

[Hendrik]

Why not just merge new "Movie (Spotlight)" on top of the template elements so it will be active template for media sub type movies until manual user intervention? Personally I don't mind a little clean up on my xml file but can see some justified criticism/support req coming from this

Is that really less work then restoring a backup, which we created for you?
We could add a clarifying prompt on that dialog, so people are aware of the backup, but otherwise it seems like a similar amount of effort, while making it cleaner for most users, and less complicated as we need to keep upgrading it during development of these templates.

[lepa]

Is that really less work then restoring a backup, which we created for you?
We could add a clarifying prompt on that dialog, so people are aware of the backup, but otherwise it seems like a similar amount of effort, while making it cleaner for most users.

Restoring a backup also loses the new JRiver template which is not be desired by you I would think after the work you put into it. I can edit that XML to include it again but others might have problems.

[terrym@tassie]

We could add a clarifying prompt on that dialog, so people are aware of the backup, but otherwise it seems like a similar amount of effort, while making it cleaner for most users, and less complicated as we need to keep upgrading it during development of these templates.

So, do you intend to overwrite the entire file every time you release an update to the templates? Which would require a user to restore their backup?

[lepa]

Perhaps you could freeze the name of the default template and prevent users to create user templates with the same name. Then you could always replace that template during installation without affecting user created templates

[JimH]

Perhaps you could freeze the name of the default template and prevent users to create user templates with the same name. Then you could always replace that template during installation without affecting user created templates

Yes, perhaps.  I'd prefer to see users move when necessary instead of JRiver trying to avoid what they do.

[JimH]

Restoring a backup also loses the new JRiver template which is not be desired by you I would think after the work you put into it. I can edit that XML to include it again but others might have problems.

Restoring from an old version isn't very common, and the problem goes away over time.  32.0.10 will seem ancient soon.

[JimH]

Locking this because it was addressed in recent changes to MC.  If you have a custom version, protect it by making a copy and then edit its version to give it a higher version number.