Quentin,
first, let me tell you that you are amazing. In ten years of linux and open source, I've never seen a developer so committed to his work and his users. Thanks for your great work.
Now to the technical details. I don't think the drawbacks you point out are really relevant, and in fact working around them in an efficient way doesn't seem to be easy. I'm only curious about #3 (which could be particularly interesting for collections on removable media - nowadays I don't know almost anybody with a static mountpoint for a removable drive): why making it fstab only? Is there any particular reason for not relying on mtab only? Which, by the way, could simplify a lot of the work when inotify support is live.
About #2, I don't think 20s is a lot. You already have to scan the whole tree for songs at least once, which takes a lot more than this, and it could be done at the same time. But then again, I don't know if the network overhead is relevant here.
first, let me tell you that you are amazing. In ten years of linux and open source, I've never seen a developer so committed to his work and his users. Thanks for your great work.
Now to the technical details. I don't think the drawbacks you point out are really relevant, and in fact working around them in an efficient way doesn't seem to be easy. I'm only curious about #3 (which could be particularly interesting for collections on removable media - nowadays I don't know almost anybody with a static mountpoint for a removable drive): why making it fstab only? Is there any particular reason for not relying on mtab only? Which, by the way, could simplify a lot of the work when inotify support is live.
About #2, I don't think 20s is a lot. You already have to scan the whole tree for songs at least once, which takes a lot more than this, and it could be done at the same time. But then again, I don't know if the network overhead is relevant here.