A workaround for that, which should work for your problem, at least if
it's an automatic playlist would be to add in the specification "Last
Played is not in the last 5 minutes" or something like it. If this
doesn't help you, it might at least inspire someone else... ;)
-karsten
On Thu, 09 Nov 20
On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 19:53 +1100, James "Doc" Livingston wrote:
> > It usually happens to me that right after playing a song the same song
> > plays again, which is very annoying. Could this be avoided?
>
> There is a reported bug about this, where the history sometimes gets
> corrupted. Hopefull
On 09/11/06, James Livingston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It probably wouldn't be too hard to use it for creating a play order,
> particularly if someone else (e.g. Listen) have done the hard work of
> figuring out how best to map what AS gives us into track selection.
Last.fm/AS give either CSV
On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 13:09 +, Rory McCann wrote:
> On 09/11/06, James Livingston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > That's what the patch (on bug 163196) basically does, except it replaces
> > both the shuffle and repeat toggles with a menu. Having a menu also
> > means that we can expose the othe
On 09/11/06, James Livingston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's what the patch (on bug 163196) basically does, except it replaces
> both the shuffle and repeat toggles with a menu. Having a menu also
> means that we can expose the other player orders RB has, and add new
> ones like "repeat single
On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 16:18 +0700, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:
> I don't know about this. It's IMHO unintuitive. Why not replace
> shuffle button with a combobox saying "flat" shuffle, rate-based
> shuffle and no shuffle?
That's what the patch (on bug 163196) basically does, except it replaces
bot
On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 11:07 +, Peter wrote:
> I haven't checked the code, but the fact you say "unrated is treated as
> 3" leads me to think that "zero stars" is the same as "unrated".
>
> Is that correct?
Yes.
James "Doc" Livingston
--
"There are some benefits to high blood pressure", Bo
James "Doc" Livingston wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 18:10 +, Peter wrote:
>> I would like a rating-weigted random mode (where more stars means more
>> likely to be played; but taking into account the total tracks for each
>> rating), but that's getting complicated...
>
> If you have the sh
On 11/9/06, James Doc Livingston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 09:37 +0100, David Prieto wrote:
> > El jue, 09-11-2006 a las 18:34 +1100, James "Doc" Livingston escribió:
> > > If you have the shuffle and repeat options on, it does this. In case
> > > someone wants to know the
If you have shuffle on and repeat off, it should work like this.
I'll make sure repeat is turned off then. Thanks a lot Doc.
___
rhythmbox-devel mailing list
rhythmbox-devel@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/rhythmbox-devel
On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 09:37 +0100, David Prieto wrote:
> El jue, 09-11-2006 a las 18:34 +1100, James "Doc" Livingston escribió:
> > If you have the shuffle and repeat options on, it does this. In case
> > someone wants to know the exact formula is the following (unrated is
> > treated as 3):
> >
El jue, 09-11-2006 a las 18:34 +1100, James "Doc" Livingston escribió:
If you have the shuffle and repeat options on, it does this. In case
someone wants to know the exact formula is the following (unrated is
treated as 3):
weight = rating * log(time since last played)
Maybe not direc
Actually, this is a good workaround.
I did what Peter suggested and created an automatic playlist for 2
or more stars in the rating. I also added a second line item for rating
is 0. I then checked the "if any criteria are met". So that gives me
2-5, and 0, but not 1.
So now, any songs
that's a good idea - I'll give it a try.
I rather NOT rate the songs, since if it has no rating I know that I
need to rate it.
I rate songs like so:
1. I hate it, I never want to hear it again
2. Bearable
3. Average, I won't skip to the next if it comes on
4. Good, sometimes I ro
On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 18:10 +, Peter wrote:
> I would like a rating-weigted random mode (where more stars means more
> likely to be played; but taking into account the total tracks for each
> rating), but that's getting complicated...
If you have the shuffle and repeat options on, it does th
"I would like a rating-weigted random mode (where more stars means more
likely to be played; but taking into account the total tracks for each
rating), but that's getting complicated..."
I think RB already does this! In my experience, songs I've rated higher
do play more often than others.
Ma
On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 10:45 -0500, Joe Webster wrote:
> I had a thought that it would be nice to have an option that would allow
> me to Not play/skip songs with 1 star ratings. That way, once I mark it
> with one star, I won't hear it again.
>
Create an "Automatic Playlisy" with the following
Joe Webster wrote:
> I've been using the rating system in rhythmbox to help weed out songs I
> don't like. I rate them 1 star as I hear songs I don't like, then later
> I sort by rating, highlight all the 1-star songs, and move to trash. So
> far it works well.
>
> I had a thought that it would
I've been using the rating system in rhythmbox to help weed out songs I
don't like. I rate them 1 star as I hear songs I don't like, then later
I sort by rating, highlight all the 1-star songs, and move to trash. So
far it works well.
I had a thought that it would be nice to have an option that
19 matches
Mail list logo
