Re: Bug#663017: ITP: transmission-remote-cli -- ncurses interface for the Transmission BitTorrent daemon
On 08/03/12 14:23, Leo 'costela' Antunes wrote:
> On 08/03/12 13:59, Jonathan McCrohan wrote:
>>> Shouldn't it be included in the transmission-cli package instead?
>> I guess it could be included in transmission-cli. I thought
>> transmission-remote-cli would be better suited to its own package
>> because it a third-party transmission tool, and not part of the
>> transmission project itself .
> I agree it's probably better to have its own package. I also have an ITP
> for transmission-remote-gtk, which is in a similar situation.
> That being said: I haven't checked the source, but I'm a bit curious
> about its use of transmission-remote. Does it depend on specific
> input/output formats? Did upstream at some point declare a "stable API"
> for using transmission-remote in scripts? I'm just worried this might be
> a small nightmare to maintain in the long run...
I've been talking to upstream (t-r-cli) and the output appears to be
stable between RPC versions. RPC versions don't seem to change that
often in transmission, so I don't think it should be too big a deal.
When it does change, support for the new RPC is added reasonably
quickly. I guess an alternative would be to use transmissionrpc as a
python interface to the JSON service.