Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Tired of the non-portability of my playlists, I wrote my own format

universalplaylist.stavros.io

101–104 of 104 posts

Re: Show HN: Tired of the non-portability of my playlists, I wrote my own format

#101
post #74
post #67

You know what always, always works ? Copying the actual songs into a directory that becomes "the playlist". It's very inefficient and inelegant but after the 100th car stereo I encountered that couldn't make sense of the most basic m3u file, I just gave up ... my "playlists" are just more copies of the actual songs. Problem solved.

You could combine both solutions and process a playlist file to put copies in a directory whenever you need to actually use the playlist.

That's where fuse really shines. For example (note I never used it) https://github.com/rtokarev/m3ufs2

Re: Show HN: Tired of the non-portability of my playlists, I wrote my own format

#102
post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Providing enough metadata to recognize the file different ways, is exactly what you're doing. Magnet already does this. > it's better suited to torrents and things like that. I don't understand what you mean by this.

It's more suited to applications that require a URI for a single file. I don't see how it can be applied here, or what benefit it has over a simple list.

> It's more suited to applications that require a URI for a single file.

Why exactly is it more suited?

> I don't see how it can be applied here, or what benefit it has over a simple list.

Winamp supported playlists containing http urls.

If it supported magnet urls you would have every feature of your proposal and tooling to build other applications on.

You could build this in about an hour and see a portable durable playlist.

* https://github.com/captbaritone/winamp2-js

* https://github.com/feross/webtorrent

Re: Show HN: Tired of the non-portability of my playlists, I wrote my own format

#103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, good point (plus it's not fantastic for this project anyway). I'm going to think hard on this, I quite like YAML...

Fwiw I like yaml as well but it's just got a few too many issues these days. While you are thinking maybe look at this https://stedolan.github.io/jq/ and how people could leverage it when using your format.

Ah yes, I know about jq, it's fantastic. I've switched to JSON, with heavy heart, but YAML seems too big indeed.
Post reply on HN