Re: [xwax-devel] Xwax Browser by "gaswerk"?

[Lukas F. <xw...@cr...>]

On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 11:59:19AM +0200, engine wrote:
> Am 2011-04-29 10:36, schrieb Nicolas Dorwig:
> > Hello there,
> >
> > after searching for xwax-related videos on Youtube I stumbled over a
> > video named "xwax browser by gaswerk"
> > (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4IlOmQIHqk)
> >
> > Do you know where I can download this browser? I searched the'net for
> > a prooject homepage but the video seems to be the only thing existing
> > from this project.
> >
> > Thanks you!
> >
> > Nicolas
> 
> Hi,
> This xwax browser is still used by me and my crew frequently.
> Unfortunately we still use xwax-0.6 because i was not able to modify the
> patch for later releases :/
> in case you are interested here is the TCP patch for xwax-0.6
> http://pastebin.com/fwYFcZbK which is a requirement for our php/mysql
> based xwax-browser.
> 
> Further i have tried a lot of web-interface based music-browsers to use
> it as xwax-filebrowser ( a few days ago it was http://www.subsonic.org/
> ). It's not that hard to add a link to each file which executes a
> tcp-command. There are some applications that looks pretty solid and
> useable but i still havn't found a music library software which can
> handle really big music collections.
> 
> As long as there is no "official way" to control xwax via an external
> program (example TCP socket) i don't think its a good idea to do further
> developing on "my" xwax browser. Hopefully some day there is no more
> need to do such dirty hacks for controlling xwax which will bring the
> possibility to extend any kind of musicbrowser software to use it as
> xwax-filebrowser.

I proposed to make track selection more modular a long time ago [1]...
Music library management with categorization and search functionality
simply doesn't belong in a vinyl emulation program. Providing these as
an external program would allow for network transparent track loading,
music tagging and dynamic music directory trees (just to give a few
examples) without modifying any SLoC. Also, it would slim down our code
base to contain core functionality only.

According to the poor amount of replys to my original mail, I'd say
there isn't any interest to implement this tho...

[1] http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=20100905093136.GA13429%40elnino.cryptocrack.de&forum_name=xwax-devel