Feature #1541
Feature Request: Rename "extra priority" to "additional cost"
0%
Description
Just a thought... there's been intermittent debate about how people interpret the priority of adapters, and the fact that the mechanism is upside-down (i.e. increasing the "extra priority" actually decreases the priority of that adapter).
Why not just rename it in the WebUI (and maybe config files, but less important) to something like "additional cost to use" or similar? Might make more sense then...
History
Updated by Adam Sutton almost 11 years ago
Updated by I agree with this, I just don't like "additional cost". We need some succinct way of describing the fact its the inverse of what people expect.
De-priotise? still not good
Adam
Updated by Prof Yaffle almost 11 years ago
Updated by I asked SWMBO for a view from a non-technical perspective, and simply had "why don't you add a note that says '0=highest priority, 10000=lowest?'".
If we want to keep it as a checkbox with a simple description, then I suppose you're into "cost" instead of "priority", since that's effectively what you're doing ("Increase adapter cost by..."). Dredging other euphemisms, all I can think of otherwise is something around "adapter queue position" or "serving position" - kind of take-a-ticket style.
Updated by
Updated by Prof Yaffle about 10 years ago
Sam Stenvall wrote:
I believe this has been fixed?
Agree. Current model is apparently:
Streaming PriorityThe tuner priority value for streamed channels through HTTP or HTSP (higher value = higher priority to use this tuner). If not set (zero), the standard priority value is used.
Updated by