QUOTE(Peter @ Jun 23 2008, 11:17)

[...]As for beta 2, get_lock_name() only returns "Autoplaylist", I'll change it to return proper labels so you can pretty much fully implement editing with existing APIs.
Thanks, but there wasn't a problem with there being new APIs. New APIs are usually good news

But I am not planning to implement this whilst I can't disable the command for pre-0.9.5.4 beta 1 users (i.e. with existing API). [edit] actually the autoplaylist methods in the SDK released a few weeks ago are surely enough to implement it for the autoplaylists, I don't know if there are any new methods for other locks though.
QUOTE(Yirkha @ Jun 23 2008, 11:21)

I'm sorry if you found that sentence outrageous. I wasn't implying you should implement random API just in case they will work tomorrow. My reply was targetted mainly at the derogation tone of the OP, bitching along those well-known lines of preventing "unfaithful users" from accessing some functionality.
Right but the point was you corrected "bad reasoning" with more "bad reasoning". You didn't need to blame anyone, especially if they haven't done anything wrong...
QUOTE(foosion @ Jun 23 2008, 12:01)

[...] my own foo_playlist_manager component where I had implemented this command to be on the safe side ("Show the command, when it may do something.") rather than following a conservative approach ("Show the command, when it is guaranteed to do something."). My reason was that there are components that implemented the playlist_lock::show_ui method (read-only playlists in foo_utils as well as foo_locktest).
Well sometimes I take cues from the Default UI