Description: Movie player for GNOME ---- that is a really poor description. It should be: "movie player for Gnome based on xine" So when you emerge -S xine, you should find totem, as its a frontend for it. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3.
xine is a possible frontend.. it's not tied to xine in any way
Not true, visit their main page, and read.. I quote: "Totem is movie player for the Gnome desktop based on xine. It features a playlist, a full-screen mode, seek and volume controls, as well as a pretty complete keyboard navigation... Requirements: * xine-lib 1.0rc4a or better" It also has experimental gstreamer support, so yes, you may want to also mention gstreamer. But its really just a frontend to xine-libs. Same as kaffeine, that is descripbed like this on portage: "The Kaffeine media player for KDE3 based on xine-lib." So there is nothing invalid about my report, fix the description please.
Do you think i'm crazy. It's a gnome player, gst is the gnome media framework of choice, so gstreamer is as much a backend as xine (all of totem is pre 1.0 & experimental). Now leave it closed, we're not gonna change this. Anyway the _relevant_ info is that it is a media player, not that it is based on this or that backend. So for just that reason alone it's nonsense to change the description.
in your commend you are thinking of xine-ui that is a frontend to xine (xine-lib). Have a look at: http://xinehq.de/index.php/releases Notice both totem and kaffeine are listed as frontends. So just to clarify ;)
Again, this is *not* invalid damn it!, look at my previous comment
"Anyway the _relevant_ info is that it is a media player, not that it is based on this or that backend. So for just that reason alone it's nonsense to change the description." --- It is a frontend to xine (xine-lib), that should be noted in the description just as its noted on their site and on xine's site. There is no difference between kaffeine and totem except kaffeine in qt and for kde, and totem is gtk and for gnome. So there is no reason not to mention its based on xine-lib just as you mention it for all other players: xine-ui (0.9.23-r2): Xine movie player kaffeine (0.4.3b): The Kaffeine media player for KDE3 based on xine-lib. gxine (0.3.3): GTK+ Front-End for libxine oxine (0.2): OSD frontend for xine sinek (0.7): GTK interface for xine now totem should be in that list, with a similar description. Not what it is now: totem (0.99.5): Movie player for GNOME
"Do you think i'm crazy. It's a gnome player, gst is the gnome media framework of choice, so gstreamer is as much a backend as xine (all of totem is pre 1.0 & experimental)." --- Who said it isnt? -- I said totem also experimentally supports gstreamer as its backend instead of xine (xine-lib). So if you're so anal, the description can be: Totem: a gnome media player based on xine-lib with experimental gstreamer support. So when you search by description, you can find all players based on xine-lib or gstreamer. Totem is the only exception I can find, and its description needs to be fixed! Why is this so hard to grasp?
what do you think to achieve here ? isn't it obvious it isn't gonna happen. Given the fact that the backends are switchable, it's a blatant lie if we would say it's a xine player in the DESCRIPTION. The info is _not_ relevant. Now quit your little crusade. Ok, it's not invalid, we just wont fix it.
hope this will stop it from reopening... or we'll have to go to more desperate measures.
"Given the fact that the backends are switchable, it's a blatant lie if we would say it's a xine player in the DESCRIPTION." Not if the description is: Totem: a gnome media player based on xine-lib with experimental gstreamer support. If you would actually read my messages, you might learn something.
Also, dont threaten me. I suggested a trivial change, that makes sense, and will make descriptions in portage more concistent. I also brought many points to back up the reason for a change, all of which you either havent read, or just plain ignored. You seem to think xine is a frontend to xine-lib, its not! xine-ui is, and so is kaffeine and totem and gxine. You dont like it? fine! Doenst make it invalid. So stop acting all high and mighty like you're the only person in charge. Someone will see this report, and make the change, its just common sense, takes a few seconds and makes descriptions a little more concistent. So I'd appreciate it if you stop closing it please. So stop closing my report already.
why do i have to deal with the loonies ... devs just ignore till i get someone on bugzilla to stop this ordeal
I still dont know what you're trying to do. If you wont fix it, fine, someone else will. Just leave the bug report alone already! You yourself admitted the bug report isnt invalid, and there is obviously reasons to make the alteration. And the alteration takes literally seconds, why do you keep closing the bug? you said: "it's not invalid, we just wont fix it." --- who is we? -- I would like some of the others that are part of we to comment. The fix I'm asking for takes a few seconds, and it *is* relevant. If it wasnt relevant, all the other xine (xine-lib) based players wouldn't have that in the description. Where is the concistency in your arguments? where are your reasons not to fix it? or atleast leave the bug report alone? Someone indeed, please join in, and lets see some justice.
After talking it over with foser, there is no need to make the description alteration. Although I think it would be nice, it can be misleading, as users wanting a media player wont care much about the frontend, and totem is more than a frontend. It supports multiple backends, has a large number of features, etc.. so calling it a frontend is not true. Anyway, thanks for clearing your view, and dealing with my ranting :). And great work you're doing with gentoo's gnome. Works very well, keep up the great work!
