Closed Andy2244 closed 2 years ago
nielsvanvelzen
commented
2 years ago We've discussed this internally and decided to not include forks in the clients page on the website. You can however create a pull request for the jellyfin-docs repository to add it to the clients page in the documentation site (https://jellyfin.org/docs/general/clients/index.html).
Andy2244
commented
2 years ago We've discussed this internally and decided to not include forks in the clients page on the website.
Why does it matter, if its a fork or not? So could i get all my Zidoo specific changes merged into the base-client? If not, than you leave me no other option to contribute and offer jellyfin to this ecosystem. So if i would write a client from scratch than you would add it to the client-page? This makes no sense!
It should only matter, if potential users can find a working jellyfin client for there respective platform/device. Jellyfin does not work well on Zidoo/Dune/Zapati devices, because its reliance on libvlc/exoplayer.
jellyfin-docs repository to add it to the clients page
You know very well that no normal user really digs this deep into the documentation, unless he already knows what to look for. So any normal user will never know that there might be a working jellyfin client out there for Zidoo devices.
So having "coming soon" entries and software that is literally abandon-ware like MrMC is more important than having a actual working client entry for a popular media-box?
You should welcome any fork/software that helps promote Jellyfin over closed-source alternatives like emby/plex. Yet potential users need to-be able to find those apps.
PS: I thought getting Zidoo dev's to actually add a Android API to there FW, so i could add support for there player to jellyfin was the hand part, not getting a simple link/icon on the jellyfin homepage.
Andy2244
commented
2 years ago @nielsvanvelzen @thornbill @anthonylavado @joshuaboniface
So this is really the official policy trying to bring Jellyfin to a new ecosystem, user-base?
So let's step back and recap:
So either this means smaller brand's like Zidoo are not "worth" being listed on the main download page or for some undisclosed reason's, specifically forks are not welcome. The later point is ironic, given that jellyfin itself is a fork of emby.
So if i would have written a crappy web-wrapper from scratch, this would have been listed? Instead i opted to adapt the better AndroidTV client, mainly because its a much better user experience than a web-wrapper.
So all i wanted is to promote Jellyfin to a new platform, which is one of the only ecosystem's atm that can correctly play dolby-vision P4/5/7/8 files, hence the popularity of those devices in the avsforum.com. What i get for trying this is basically a "meh we are not really interested in this".
joshuaboniface
commented
2 years ago I think I should clarify what @nielsvanvelzen meant based on some of our internal conversations.
We absolutely don't want to discourage forks or improvements that way. What we were/are hesitant of is filling up the client lists with a lot of minor forks that don't really provide much benefit (and we've seen more than our fair share of those). Now, you've made a fair case that this platform required a lot more work that was evident at first glance, and it adds support to a platform that we are not familiar with beyond just minor tweaks, so I think that makes it worthwhile to list. No insult intended.
Andy2244
commented
2 years ago No insult intended.
Than my advice would be to take just a few more seconds to explain, communicate things. I know we all take time to work on our projects and we are not always in the mood to explain every little issue. Yet i came over from openwrt and i remember the openwrt vs LEDE debacle, which was basically just a string of miscommunications.
As example, here is a perfectly valid question one of my beta testers had: https://github.com/jellyfin/jellyfin-androidtv/discussions/1843
All he got was a literally "No", which than resulted in his "snarky" response. After some other user explained the actual issue to him, he understood what the problem is and moved on.
thornbill
commented
2 years ago You made a fair point that we have not had clear guidelines around what makes a client acceptable to be listed on the website. We are working to resolve that in https://github.com/jellyfin/jellyfin-meta/discussions/27.
Of course we don't want to discourage forks or third-party apps in any way. In fact we frequently interact with the developers of such apps to help them implement new features, resolve bugs, or promote new releases.
My main objection to the Zidoo app being listed is that it violates our Branding Guidelines by representing itself as an official Jellyfin app as a result of the nature of it being a fork without any rebranding. Those guidelines exist to prevent support issues being filed incorrectly, potential issues with deploying an official app to a store in the future, and general confusion around what is or is not an official Jellyfin app.
As far as https://github.com/jellyfin/jellyfin-androidtv/discussions/1843 is concerned, that question has been asked and answered repeatedly over the past 4 years. If someone were to go through the minimal effort of making a simple search the answer can be easily found. A low effort question will sometimes get a low effort response in return.
Andy2244
commented
2 years ago being a fork without any rebranding
I did actually add some zidoo branding to the install icon and use "zidoo-edition" for the apk and internal version names, just as a basic way to distinguish the official app from the fork. I also disabled all debug, report settings, while also trying to follow the official releases.
Also no one did raise or pointed me to the rebranding issue?
If someone were to go through the minimal effort of making a simple search the answer can be easily found
Can you point me to an example where this was discussed, addressed? I can't find any hits via google or closed issues on this?
thornbill
commented
2 years ago Sure... searching for "jellyfin android tv web theme" returns a bunch of relevant Reddit posts as the top result.
Andy2244
commented
2 years ago Fair enough, guess i used the wrong word combinations than.
So whats the hold-up here?