SageTV XBMC plugin

[sflamm]

Trying to judge interest in the development of a SageTV XMBC plugin.
Please indicate your interest....

UPDATE: This is now a Kickstarter project... please support the project with donations: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/...etv-pvr-plugin

[LehighBri]

I'm assuming you're asking about a XBMC PVR addon that uses XBMC's native PVR functions?

There's already a SageTV python-based addon that allows you to playback and manage your recordings, but it doesn't integrate with the XBMC PVR functionality.

Add on description: http://wiki.xbmc.org/index.php?title=Add-on:SageTV
Add on source: https://github.com/kricker/plugin.video.sagetv
Support forum: http://forum.xbmc.org/showthread.php?tid=138838

[7up]

Definitely worth having

[sflamm]

I'm assuming you're asking about a XBMC PVR addon that uses XBMC's native PVR functions?

Correct. Follow-up to our previous thread discussion. The idea is to have a native plug-in similar to the other plugins that XBMC has for competing back-ends.

With the right interest level someone might be interested in spending their time... otherwise it will be a hard sell.

I personally still love my SageTV and would like to keep the backend versus a WMC, NextPVR, etc...

[LehighBri]

Originally Posted by sflamm

I personally still love my SageTV and would like to keep the backend versus a WMC, NextPVR, etc...

Likewise. I'm about to swap out my Ceton for a HDHomeRun Prime to increase stability and am going to stick with SageTV as long as possible.

[Skirge01]

By nodes, are you talking about clients (e.g. full PC or extender-like)? So, if someone has 2 client PCs plus 2 HD300s, for the last option, they'd be looking at $20?

I'm all for this... conditionally. First, the financial logistics could be daunting, unless we know and trust the developer. Does someone collect all the money and hold it before development starts? Who? Does the dev get 50% up front and 50% when it's finished? What's "finished"? Does the money just keep going directly to the dev as long as people are buying this nonexistent software during development? I have some ideas, but I was wondering what you were thinking.

Second, and this is absolutely imperative from my perspective. When the project is finished, the software must be free for all and open sourced.

[sflamm]

Correct - per node means per client (i.e. Extender or SageTV Client).

As for payment, my thinking was like other plugins in the past - folks would purchase licenses to use when the software is complete. If there was no license then the plugin would not function.

[Skirge01]

Originally Posted by sflamm

Correct - per node means per client (i.e. Extender or SageTV Client).

As for payment, my thinking was like other plugins in the past - folks would purchase licenses to use when the software is complete. If there was no license then the plugin would not function.

Then this would be a licensing model, post-release. While I'm okay with that, (Devil's advocate time) I'm confused about how we'd be able to convince someone to even begin such a project without any money upfront. Let's face it, people may claim they'd be interested, but may not follow through with a license purchase for one reason or another. The dev could wind up doing all that work and having nothing to show for it.

I'm not trying to shoot down the idea, as I actually like it, but I think these are pretty important questions.

[sflamm]

Understood. That is the purpose of the poll. If there arent enough respondents then it is clear that there are few that are truly interested.

In theory there should be hundreds if not thousands of SageTV users that would like to preserve their existing investment by attaching XBMC with its many features including multitude of clients (i.e. R-Pi, Ouya) and online content access to the rock solid PVR capabilities of SageTV.

Like all software - if the target market is significant enough then someone will produce the product. If it is just a handful of devotees then it is not worth the investment. (that is the criteria I would personally use before taking up the project).

If the interest numbers are high enough it will not matter if a few change their minds - it will be statistically noise.

[7up]

Is there any way to give this poll better visibility or make it a sticky? Greater visibility shouldn't skew the poll results as people are still free to vote their opinion.

Do you have any idea what sort of dollar figure is needed for bounty?

[sflamm]

Agreed. I tried to cross-post it but Opus took it down.

Not sure how to increase visibility - ideas?

[sflamm]

Do you have any idea what sort of dollar figure is needed for bounty?

Looking at license model not bounty.

[7up]

Originally Posted by sflamm

Agreed. I tried to cross-post it but Opus took it down.

Not sure how to increase visibility - ideas?

PM every registered member? I agree with the reasoning that most, not all, SageTV users would like the option of being able to add an extender if a nominal site licensing fee of 10-15 dollars was requested to cover dev expense.

Unfortunately, I don't think the traffic to the poll will be sufficient to attract enough users.

[mechling-burgh]

I would pay $15.00 for even if I didn't need it right away. I have two HD300's in use and one backup unit in case one fails. So right now I would not use this. That said it's worth paying the $15.00 even up front just so I have options in the future, anything that can keep sageTV going as long as we can.

[Skirge01]

@sflamm: Thanks for the clarifications. It sounds like you or someone you know may be interested in taking it up... for the right price. I would certainly support that choice if it pans out. However, I do wonder if the bounty approach wouldn't be a better way. As a supporter of several Kickstarter projects, I know that there are quite a few people (myself included) who will pay significantly more than what something is worth to the majority, simply because they want/support it. Those people could push the bounty up higher than expected. As an example, without any hesitation, I'd throw in 100 toward such a bounty, but again, with the caveats I mentioned earlier.

[sflamm]

I do wonder if the bounty approach wouldn't be a better way

It is possible. My guess is that might be harder to raise a bounty... if you take the average $ / hr that software developer makes and multiple it against the time it would take to code, debug and support the effort it is significant.

A cheap software developer is min $75/hr
The delivery effort is minimum of 3 weeks or 120 hours conservatively
Total cost at least --> $9000

That is why I thought it might be more practical to charge a small but fair price against a larger number of people..

With that said, we can always try the kickstarter route... I'll set one up and see what happens.

[BobPhoenix]

Originally Posted by mechling-burgh

I would pay $15.00 for even if I didn't need it right away. ... it's worth paying the $15.00 even up front just so I have options in the future, anything that can keep sageTV going as long as we can.

+1

[panteragstk]

This is one of those things that someone would have to do in their spare time because it will be useful to them. Trying to pay someone to do this and then support it when it eventually comes out isn't going to happen. You'll get one without the other. If we could get the source and have one of our known devs support it that'd be one thing. If one of us dedicated members doesn't do this it won't get done IMHO.

I wish I had the time and knowledge, but I have no time and no programming skills.

[LWM4P]

This would be my favorite option once my HD300 die... otherwise, I would just be sticking with the usual sage interface. Means I voted yes, I would pay $15 for the integration module.

[sflamm]

Trying to pay someone to do this and then support it

If it is a kickstarter project then the code will end up as open source and anyone of the key SageTV contributors will be able to maintain/update it.

If it is a license model then whoever is collecting for the licenses will be obligated to maintain it for some maintenance period (part of the agreement of purchasing a license). I imagine it would still return to the open domain after some period of time... just like all the other plugins that eventually became free.