mymikemiller / a-simple-lastfm-scrobbler

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/a-simple-lastfm-scrobbler
GNU General Public License v3.0
0 stars 0 forks source link

Add Support for Caching Tracks when currently offline #8

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
I'd like to request a feature, which enables the app to cache tracks when
you listen to them and you're not online, to submit them laster to last.fm,
when you're online again.
Like the official Scrobbler for PCs does.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by rcrace...@gmail.com on 12 Sep 2009 at 2:59

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
It already does that, although it might be difficult to see. But if you go 
offline
and listen to some songs, they will be submitted when (sometime after) you go 
online
again.

Original comment by tgwizard on 12 Sep 2009 at 9:46

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
but it only scrobbles the old songs when you listen to a new one when online, 
doesn't it?

keep it up ;)
best regards

Original comment by rcrace...@gmail.com on 12 Sep 2009 at 9:49

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
hmm. It will scrobble the saved tracks 1) when you restart the sls (through a 
force
kill or reboot), 2) when you listen to a new song while online, and 3) after a
internal timer has timed out.

This timer is set for sls to check whether it can submit the scrobbles or not, 
and is
increased each time it fails. So, if you were offline for a long time, it could 
take
a very long time after you go online again for the scrobbles to be submitted.

I've implemented it this way because it is very easy, and cause I haven't yet 
figured
out how/if to make android send a notification when it's online again.

It isn't perfect, or even very good, but it works for now.

I'll keep trying to improve it.

Thanks for the feedback!

Original comment by tgwizard on 12 Sep 2009 at 9:57

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
I'll keep this issue open until I find a better solution.

Original comment by tgwizard on 12 Sep 2009 at 10:01

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Sorry, ignore 1) above. It's incorrect, and thus this is quite an issue.

Original comment by tgwizard on 12 Sep 2009 at 10:20

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by tgwizard on 12 Sep 2009 at 10:20

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Fixed in 1.1

Original comment by tgwizard on 14 Sep 2009 at 4:08