Talk:BMPx
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents[hide] |
[edit] "More Usable" iTunes-style interface
Isn't the phrase "a more integrated and usable iTunes look that popular players such as Amarok have adopted" a statement of opinion? Personally, I find XMMS-style players more "usable" than confounding iTunes-esque layouts. I'm going to edit that out. --mDuo13 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.81.120.158 (talk) 18:28, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Inherited Code
Hi, i'm one of the 2 lead developers of BMPx and i'm also the guy who back then forked XMMS into the "old" BMP.
BMPx was rewritten completely from scratch, and shares almost no code with the former BMP (and thus XMMS) codebase. Even in BMP, we had already refactored about 60-70% of the code. The code that has been rewritten from scratch includes, but is not limited to:
- The playback engine
- The skinning engine (Sic. It is _also_ a Winamp 2.x one, but i wrote it from scratch)
- The core (XMMS doesn't really have a single "core", but just to put the point)
- All additional UI dialogs/systems
- The remote interface (it's now DBus based and has nothing to do with the XMMS one)
- The database engine and backend (written by Chong Kai Xiong, the other lead developer on BMP/BMPx) and on-disk storage of it (written by me). XMMS had no database really, but also just to state a point
Well i could continue the list, but i guess it suffices to say that almost everything has been rewritten. Almost, because we kept a small portion of the old code, which mostly consists though only of auxilliary functions to manipulate data structures like GLists, string vectors, etc, and some file utilities, and even _those_ functions had been already refactored by us during the BMP development stage.
So i think we can sanely state that we are approx 99% "XMMS-inherited-code"-free, and in _any_ case in the relevant portions that constitute "BMPx, the audio player".
Just to clarify the point :)
(I hope i used the Talk page right, i'm not that much used to MediaWiki Talk pages, if i created a mess, all apologies :P) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.23.141.133 (talk • contribs) .
- You did everything right except to sign your name at the end. Thanks for the information. Ashibaka tock 21:49, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
- Very nice to read you here, however Wikipedia is supposed to reflect information which has been published/disseminated elsewhere, and say so, by sourcing all statements. If you write stuff which you are knowledgeable about but haven't established elsewhere, then that is considered original research, and not acceptable (in the body of an article) </nag>. Other than that, thank you much for your open source contribution. --Jerome Potts 05:25, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Grammatical corrections and POSIX
I have corrected a few aspects of the article relating to BMPx being for "POSIX". This was a technical inaccuracy, as uninformed readers would assume POSIX was an operating system instead of an industry standard. The appropriate use is to use "modern Unixes" instead, which it now does. --nenolod (talk) 16:11, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Inherited Code
Why is so much space spent detailing the fact that no XMMS code is used? It seems like there is some pride here that code reuse from another project approaches 0. Cuurious.
- I've just rewritten the section, have a look and give me your thoughts. Thanks, Descender 07:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Domain issue?
The project's website address (beep-media-player.org) leads to some domain parking scam. I'll remove the links in the article. 91.21.117.10 (talk) 13:11, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
nl/Seven: I'll link'em to http://bmpx.backtrace.info/ , as where the domain was moved to the last time the domain was stolen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.45.81.57 (talk) 19:54, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
I made the currently abused domain pure text and added the backtrace.info one in the info box. No need to give those scammers referer traffic. 131.246.19.47 (talk) 13:04, 7 January 2008 (UTC)