Page 1 of 1

[QUESTION(s)] TelegramBot alternative to PushBullet/PushOver

Posted: 19 Sep 2015, 16:33
by CENGOiSM
Hi everyone,

i'm new to this forum, but I'm a real fan of FileBot and was wandering around this forum for quite a while. :D

Used PushOver (for one week trial ...) and then wanted to switch to PushBullet, but i dont like that it is connected to a Google/Facebook account. So after I discovered the Telegram Bots API https://core.telegram.org/bots (in short, you get a secure encrypted channel between your FileBot running machine and your smartphone/pc/every other telegram enabled device) I thought myself, why not build a bot which fits your needs.

I'm thinking of a more actionable version of the pushbullet/pushover implementation (like if one file could not processed, ask the user via the chat what the title is, rather using a not identifiable filename).

My question now: is there a way to hook into the amc script, to get results of a process, like a return value or something.
Because I don't want to customize the amc script, and always get the newest version remotely.
Or can one put a request for a function, method like "Please add a function, to share the results of the processed files". If yes, i'm requesting something like this. :D


I hope my thoughts are understandable, I'm from germany, so excuse me for my english, if I made mistakes. Thanks :)

Re: [QUESTION(s)] TelegramBot alternative to PushBullet/Push

Posted: 19 Sep 2015, 17:08
by rednoah
Thanks for helping you in the forums, your other posts shows that you know what you're doing! :D

1.
The amc script filebot call will only give you back a simple exit value, and if you then want to do something in case of success/error you'd have to parse the log file.

2.
If you just need old/new file paths then that's quite easy since FileBot keeps a history file so you can easy get that information by reading history.xml or by calling the history script.

3.
A console-interactive (or telegram-bot-interactive) version of the amc script might be very tricky though, since the lower level filebot calls (rename, getSubtitles, etc) are non-interactive by design.

Re: [QUESTION(s)] TelegramBot alternative to PushBullet/Push

Posted: 21 Sep 2015, 17:39
by CENGOiSM
rednoah wrote:Thanks for helping you in the forums, your other posts shows that you know what you're doing! :D

1.
The amc script filebot call will only give you back a simple exit value, and if you then want to do something in case of success/error you'd have to parse the log file.

2.
If you just need old/new file paths then that's quite easy since FileBot keeps a history file so you can easy get that information by reading history.xml or by calling the history script.

3.
A console-interactive (or telegram-bot-interactive) version of the amc script might be very tricky though, since the lower level filebot calls (rename, getSubtitles, etc) are non-interactive by design.

I hope I could help the user in the other thread. :)

Hmm, parsing the log file could be a potential beginning - better than nothing. :D
History.xml shows only made actions - so files which could not be matched are missing if I understand correct?

Thats true, but if i researched right, filebot can be called like this (use "XYZ" as matching argument for file.mkv")
Also I don't like the pushbullet/pushover integration, where the old filename is broadcasted, rather than the matched title. :D

Is there a possibility to extend the functions of a existing method in amc, which then gets part of the official amc script?

Re: [QUESTION(s)] TelegramBot alternative to PushBullet/Push

Posted: 21 Sep 2015, 19:16
by rednoah
1.
If you set --def unsorted=y then the amc script will process unmatched files into a separate folder, and then the files should show up in history.xml as well.

2.
If you need to force the movie/episode information that you can use --q and --filter parameters depending on the exact use-case.

3.
You can fork your own amc script and play with it, figure out how to best integrate with the Telegram API. I think it's a bit tricky though, especially if you want something other than what's already there for PushBullet/PushOver.