Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Feature Request] Support One to Many user mapping Plex to Jellyfin #127

Open
burneystarke opened this issue Dec 13, 2023 · 2 comments
Open

Comments

@burneystarke
Copy link

burneystarke commented Dec 13, 2023

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Using a usermapping like
USER_MAPPING = { "plexuser": "jellyfinuser1", "plexuser":"jellyfinuser2", "plexuser":"jellyfinuser3" }
results in only mapping plexuser to jellyfinuser3

Describe the solution you'd like
Support one to many mapping plex->jellyfin

Describe alternatives you've considered
Mapping Plex to Jellyfin for the primary user then Jellyfin to Jellyfin for the other users.

Additional context
I am not well versed in python, but this appears to be a due to:

  • combine_user_lists function using a hashtable and overriding the mapped user as it iterates
  • generate_server_connections function returning plex first

I am not sure if it would be better to allow the users[plexuser] to be an array type, or for users object to be an array of hashes?

I'll try the cascading sync with multiple copies of the same JellyFin server.

Thank you for your time and effort in building this tool for us all.

@burneystarke
Copy link
Author

multiple copies of the same Jellyfin server did not work for me. For now I'll run multiple copies of Jellyplex-watched

@luigi311
Copy link
Owner

luigi311 commented Jan 5, 2024

Yeah this doesnt work in the current implementation due to how i have some of the functions working to support the mapping. I will need to redesign some of the functions so this is possible without breaking the current .env formatting. Until then multiple instances of jellyplex-watched is definitely the way to go

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants