Feature #1541
closed
Feature Request: Rename "extra priority" to "additional cost"
Added by Prof Yaffle over 12 years ago.
Updated over 10 years ago.
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...
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
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.
I believe this has been fixed?
Sam Stenvall wrote:
I believe this has been fixed?
Agree. Current model is apparently:
Streaming Priority
The 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.
- Status changed from New to Fixed
Also available in: Atom
PDF
Updated by 
Updated by 
Updated by 
Updated by