Is there a way to disable creation of the nfo file for DVR'd content?

[GrimReaper 3301]

3 minutes ago, lukeoslavia said:

Asking for a slight change, even an optional one, is like pulling teeth.

Where Feature Request for same hasn't received a single upvote in over a year - yep, rightly so. Top of my head, I could count ten requests that have gained considerable traction, but have not been implemented as of yet. And majority of those have NO alternative way to be achieved. This one has. You're overcomplicating. 

[Guest]

Just now, GrimReaper said:

Where Feature Request for same hasn't received a single upvote in over a year - yep, rightly so. Top of my head, I could count ten requests that have gained considerable traction, but have not been implemented as of yet. And majority of those have NO alternative way to be achieved. This one has. You're overcomplicating. 

Not overcomplicating, asking for improvement. Just because people haven't upvoted a post, which was marked as solved, with an implication it was going to be worked on, it wasn't, does not mean people don't want the change to happen.

Also, your argument is basically what I said the attitude of emby seemed to be. If you want a change, change it yourself. I'd be fine with that if I was working for emby, but alas I'm not, just paying to use their software

[GrimReaper 3301]

Just now, lukeoslavia said:

Also, your argument is basically what I said the attitude of emby seemed to be. If you want a change, change it yourself.

Nope, it means only so much can be done in certain timeframe with limited resources. And features need to be prioritized. Taking into account demand for it and usability across. Implementation/Gain (or loss of it) ratio. Noone is saying that yours won't implemented at some point. In the meantime, you've been given an alternative to achieve it. 

[Carlo 4330]

9 minutes ago, lukeoslavia said:

Not overcomplicating, asking for improvement. Just because people haven't upvoted a post, which was marked as solved, with an implication it was going to be worked on, it wasn't, does not mean people don't want the change to happen.

Also, your argument is basically what I said the attitude of emby seemed to be. If you want a change, change it yourself. I'd be fine with that if I was working for emby, but alas I'm not, just paying to use their software

That's the thing we are trying to explain.  This would not be an improvement, but the opposite as data loss can occur because of this type of change.
There is no logical reason to remove the NFO of a recorded file as the system is built to use it.

Sorry if anything said comes across as "attitude" as that is not the intention.  We're just trying to explain this would not be a good thing to as it can break functionality that's needed.

[GrimReaper 3301]

26 minutes ago, lukeoslavia said:

Not overcomplicating, asking for improvement.

What may be "improvement" for you, might be "detrimential" for someone else. 

27 minutes ago, lukeoslavia said:

I'd be fine with that if I was working for emby, but alas I'm not, just paying to use their software

That does not entitle you nor it does preclude that you'll get all your wishes fulfilled. It doesn't work like that for none of us. And we all have ideas what would make Emby "better". 

15 minutes ago, cayars said:

This would not be an improvement, but the opposite as data loss can occur because of this type of change.

 

24 minutes ago, GrimReaper said:

Implementation/Gain (or loss of it) ratio

 

17 minutes ago, cayars said:

We're just trying to explain this would not be a good thing

We are also debating viability of a request. I, for one, would surely not appreciate time and resources being devoted to developing this at the expense of number of features that would be vastly more beneficial to the community as a whole. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, cayars said:

That's the thing we are trying to explain.  This would not be an improvement, but the opposite as data loss can occur because of this type of change.
There is no logical reason to remove the NFO of a recorded file as the system is built to use it.

Sorry if anything said comes across as "attitude" as that is not the intention.  We're just trying to explain this would not be a good thing to as it can break functionality that's needed.

I don't think you gave me any attitude, aside from the whole go find metadata for X football game, good luck thing. Not mad about that at all though, was just a bit off-putting.

My point is, the nfo system, for sports and news, things that don't match with internet metadata are going to have improper metadata pretty often anyway. So I don't see the benefit to retaining that data. It would make more sense to work on that problem, or, give us the option not to use that system. Since others seem to be far more accepting of plugins than me, maybe we can get a plugin added to the catalog that simply allows us to not disable nfo generation. That way, it wouldn't be an unintentional disabling of the nfo files.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, GrimReaper said:

What may be "improvement" for you, might be "detrimential" for someone else. 

It would be optional, therefor not a detriment to others.

2 minutes ago, GrimReaper said:

That does not entitle you nor it does preclude that you'll get all your wishes fulfilled. It doesn't work like that for none of us. And we all have ideas what would make Emby "better". 

I never once, said or implied, that I was entitled to all or any of my wishes being fulfilled. You are putting words in my words here.

4 minutes ago, GrimReaper said:

This would not be an improvement, but the opposite as data loss can occur because of this type of change.

Again see point one, we are asking for an option, not a mandate. Though a rework of this system would be best, in my opinion.

5 minutes ago, GrimReaper said:

We are also debating viability of a request. I, for one, would surely not appreciate time and resources being devoted to developing this at the expense of number of features that would be vastly more beneficial to the community as a whole.

And you are perfectly entitled to your opinion there, as everyone else is. But using what you want as a reason to stop others from getting their requests fulfilled seems more selfish than helpful. If this option helps users, then it would be a benefit to users. You can't know what is most beneficial to everyone else.

 Also, you seem to be in attack mode here, but maybe I'm reading too much into it, if I offended you in some way, I'm sorry.

[GrimReaper 3301]

2 minutes ago, lukeoslavia said:

Also, you seem to be in attack mode here, but maybe I'm reading too much into it, if I offended you in some way, I'm sorry.

I apologise if I came in too harsh, that was not the intention. I might've been irked a bit, but did try to explain few times that you DO have an alternative at this very moment to achieve what you're after - I wish I had it for few things of my own. Regardless, at no point was I "using what I want as a reason to stop others from getting their requests fulfilled", each of the requests referred was made by someone else and mostly supported by someone else, for majority of them I personally have no use whatsoever. But I do understand that devoting resources to develop those would benefit the community in a greater manner than this - I'd call that quite selfless, actually, not close to selfish. Just take a look at Feature Request tracking thread (which hasn't been updated in a long time, btw) and you'll see how much stuff is there to be implemented yet. And yes, how much traction and upvotes a feature gets is pretty good indication of its validity (not only limited by those, of course). 

[Carlo 4330]

8 minutes ago, lukeoslavia said:

My point is, the nfo system, for sports and news, things that don't match with internet metadata are going to have improper metadata pretty often anyway. So I don't see the benefit to retaining that data

I think that's likely where we disagree.  The guide will/should be correct for the media as recorded. This information usually comes from the networks or producers. If there is a discrepancy between the data who is likely to be correct the source of the media/data or a 3rd party "no-one" on the Internet helping to input information on a website?

Don't get me wrong, there can be conflicts between the guide data and online meta-data providers on some shows especially if you compare broadcast to disc rips as the ordering can be different. This can really show up when you move recorded data to a TV Library set to pull down meta-data as your mixing media from two different sources.

Just personal opinion on this but if I'm going to move the data to a TV Library I can then choose to keep or remove the NFO data during this process and possibly rename the episode with different season/episode numbering. Up until the time I move the data, I have two separate libraries of shows each set for the content type and indirectly for the ordering (broadcast vs disc).

So this is kind of why IMHO it doesn't make sense to remove the NFO file until you actually want to put it in another library.  At that time you can choose how to handle it and determine if you also need to rename and/or renumber the episodes to match the online providers. But a straight move could get you the wrong episode info.

Same if you didn't have the NFO and had to rebuild the recording library. It could pull in online info which won't match the actual episode (but the guide data will).

One thing for sure, if this conflict didn't exist we probably wouldn't be discussing this.

[GrimReaper 3301]

47 minutes ago, lukeoslavia said:

maybe we can get a plugin added to the catalog that simply allows us to not disable nfo generation

Post your query in Scrpter-X plugin forum section, it is quite likely that @Anthony Musgrove will come up with the solution for your usage case. 

[Carlo 4330]

6 hours ago, lukeoslavia said:

Since others seem to be far more accepting of plugins than me, maybe we can get a plugin added to the catalog that simply allows us to not disable nfo generation. That way, it wouldn't be an unintentional disabling of the nfo files.

What OS are you running Emby Server on?

[Guest]

5 hours ago, cayars said:

What OS are you running Emby Server on?

I meant to say allows us TO disable the nfo generation.

Also, I use unraid for my daily driver media servers, windows for testing.

Edited September 25, 2021 by lukeoslavia

[Tony B. 38]

On 7/20/2020 at 9:47 AM, Luke said:

That's correct. There's currently no way to turn this off. It's possible for the future.

Can I just delete these files? Or, are they needed for Emby?

[Luke 37085]

3 hours ago, Tony B. said:

Can I just delete these files? Or, are they needed for Emby?

Up to you I guess, but they are your only source of permanent metadata from the guide data. Meaning if you record the news, then delete the nfo, then metadata gets refreshed, you might get an incorrect match with internet metadata and all of a sudden your recording of the News is now the Breaking News movie, or something like that.

[MBSki 1016]

3 hours ago, Tony B. said:

Can I just delete these files? Or, are they needed for Emby?

It depends what you're recording and if you move the video files. I normally record, then move the videos to the appropriate library. The DVR is just 1 big, mixed library and too messy IMO. I like to organize everything after it's recorded, and when I do, I delete the nfo. You actually can't delete the nfo in the recordings folder. It'll just regenerate. At least that's what happens when I delete it, but it might regenerate after a metadata refresh and grab different info.