-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 198
Add bbc sounds provider #2567
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: dev
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Add bbc sounds provider #2567
Conversation
…-assistant-server into add-bbc-sounds-provider
|
So you weren't able to map all pre-recorded episodes to Podcast for example? |
|
Yeah its tough when they don't have a coherent structure that you can work from. My Internet Archive provider would be way worse than this as it is just a bunch of people adding "stuff" in a variety of ways. At the end of the day if people can find in MA what they can find in the native app then that would seem to be a good outcome? |
|
In regards to the logo if you can create a larger one 512x512 that would be great (wikimedia has one you could crop) and make a monochrome one as well where the three rectangles are just plain white. |
DocsFEATURES
*Requires a logged in BBC account CONFIGURATION KNOWN ISSUES/ NOTES NOT YET SUPPORTED
|
| async def get_track(self, prov_track_id: str) -> Track: | ||
| """Get full track details by id. | ||
|
|
||
| Only called if provider supports ProviderFeature.LIBRARY_TRACKS. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You dont have this feature enabled so I don't think this function should be here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not the expert here but I understand the LIBRARY_* features are for when the provider has a library of media items that you are syncing to MA. So if you have "tracks" in your BBC Sounds account then it makes it possible to pull those tracks across. So either it is a bug or the comment in the code is outdated...? Marcel will know!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
that docstring is simply not right - you are probably returning a track somewhere and when those details are viewed, the core wants to fetch the full details through this method. If that is something you wont be able to handle, we'll have to look for a workaround.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's the one from the demo provider so I need to delete it away. It works completely fine as is, I return Tracks which are streaming items. get_track() and get_stream_details() both work as I need them to, so unless it's problematic, no changes needed.
|
@kieranhogg You can review the docs here music-assistant/beta.music-assistant.io#49 Let me know if any changes are required! |
…-assistant-server into add-bbc-sounds-provider
Co-authored-by: OzGav <[email protected]>








Creating a new MR for this as I seem to have failed to rebase properly and it was showing more than the expected amount of commits in the previous one (#2283).
I've addressed the original comments raised by updating the queue details to use the new method. In hindsight I should have just fixed that and merged as the rest of the functionality took a disproportionate amount of time!
Pre-requisites before merge
Overview
This provider now implements almost all of the full BBC Sounds functionality/catalog. The logic of whether to show the UK version or the slimmed down international version is down to the Sounds API itself. I've made this a manual toggle in the settings just until it's been a bit more road-tested.
Existing issues and queries
Future discussions
With maybe a few final tweaks, this is good enough as a starting point. Looking at another iteration, these are areas I need some guidance on whether it is worth pursuing a discussion on discord/issues to improve or adapt existing functionality, or whether they are not going to be likely or possible:
Any guidance on how welcome a discussion or plan in these areas is welcome.