starred/spotify_profile_monitor

Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/misiektoja/spotify_profile_monitor.git synced 2026-04-26 07:25:56 +03:00

[GH-ISSUE #30] Transient Collaborators #17

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-02-27 20:07:42 +03:00 by kerem · 5 comments

kerem commented

2026-02-27 20:07:42 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @tomballgithub on GitHub (Jan 1, 2026).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/misiektoja/spotify_profile_monitor/issues/30

I saw that code was added to catch transient collaborators. I saw this in my log, which seems to indicate the feature didn't work. It checks at 4:58, says it will re-check at the next check, but when it does, it adds it back (so it was already removed?).

The only other oddity is the 'object is not iterable' exception which processing change in # of tracks (which is inaccurate, there wasn't a true change). Clearly a networking issue causing this, but that's the point of the transient collaborator change feature

─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
* Spotify API: suspected transient collaborator change for playlist 'AAA' (1 -> 0), streak 1/2; will confirm next check
Check interval:                 30 minutes (Wed 31 Dec 04:28 - 04:58)
Timestamp:                      Wed 31 Dec 2025, 04:58:33
─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
* Playlist 'AAA': list of tracks (9) have changed
* Playlist URL: BBB
* 
* Error while processing added/removed tracks for playlist AAA [ BBB ], skipping for now: 'NoneType' object is not iterable
Timestamp:                      Wed 31 Dec 2025, 04:58:33
─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
* Playlist 'AAAs': number of collaborators changed from 0 to 1 (+1)
* Playlist URL: BBB

Added collaborators:

-XXX [ YYY ]

Sending email notification to ZZZ
Check interval:                 30 minutes (Wed 31 Dec 04:59 - 05:29)
Timestamp:                      Wed 31 Dec 2025, 05:29:04
─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

Originally created by @tomballgithub on GitHub (Jan 1, 2026). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/misiektoja/spotify_profile_monitor/issues/30 I saw that code was added to catch transient collaborators. I saw this in my log, which seems to indicate the feature didn't work. It checks at 4:58, says it will re-check at the next check, but when it does, it adds it back (so it was already removed?). The only other oddity is the 'object is not iterable' exception which processing change in # of tracks (which is inaccurate, there wasn't a true change). Clearly a networking issue causing this, but that's the point of the transient collaborator change feature ``` ───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── * Spotify API: suspected transient collaborator change for playlist 'AAA' (1 -> 0), streak 1/2; will confirm next check Check interval: 30 minutes (Wed 31 Dec 04:28 - 04:58) Timestamp: Wed 31 Dec 2025, 04:58:33 ───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── * Playlist 'AAA': list of tracks (9) have changed * Playlist URL: BBB * * Error while processing added/removed tracks for playlist AAA [ BBB ], skipping for now: 'NoneType' object is not iterable Timestamp: Wed 31 Dec 2025, 04:58:33 ───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── * Playlist 'AAAs': number of collaborators changed from 0 to 1 (+1) * Playlist URL: BBB Added collaborators: -XXX [ YYY ] Sending email notification to ZZZ Check interval: 30 minutes (Wed 31 Dec 04:59 - 05:29) Timestamp: Wed 31 Dec 2025, 05:29:04 ───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── ```

kerem closed this issue

2026-02-27 20:07:43 +03:00

kerem commented

2026-02-27 20:07:43 +03:00

Author

Owner

@misiektoja commented on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026):

In your case, I suggest you increase COLLABORATORS_CHANGE_COUNTER to a higher value. I use a much higher interval, but since you have 30 minutes, it appears something was still wrongly reported by API during the final second check.

Regarding the changed tracks, something was wrongly returned by the Spotify API, but the code detected it, displayed an error and no notification was sent. I would say it works as designed.

@misiektoja commented on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026): In your case, I suggest you increase `COLLABORATORS_CHANGE_COUNTER` to a higher value. I use a much higher interval, but since you have 30 minutes, it appears something was still wrongly reported by API during the final second check. Regarding the changed tracks, something was wrongly returned by the Spotify API, but the code detected it, displayed an error and no notification was sent. I would say it works as designed.

kerem commented

2026-02-27 20:07:43 +03:00

Author

Owner

@tomballgithub commented on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026):

COLLABORATORS_CHANGE_COUNTER was set to '2'. And the logs show the streak reaching 1 of 2. When the next check happens in 30 minutes, and it sees "number of collaborators changed from 0 to 1 (+1)", it doesn't seem to be handling that as part of this feature change. Your explanation said something was still wrong after 30 minutes, but that is not the case per this log.

@tomballgithub commented on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026): COLLABORATORS_CHANGE_COUNTER was set to '2'. And the logs show the streak reaching 1 of 2. When the next check happens in 30 minutes, and it sees "number of collaborators changed from 0 to 1 (+1)", it doesn't seem to be handling that as part of this feature change. Your explanation said something was still wrong after 30 minutes, but that is not the case per this log.

kerem commented

2026-02-27 20:07:43 +03:00

Author

Owner

@misiektoja commented on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026):

I looked closer and indeed - you're right! When collaborators returned to the stable baseline after a transient glitch, the code cleared the pending entry, but didn't suppress the notification. It then compared the current count (1) to the previous snapshot (0) and sent a false notification. I'll fix it.

@misiektoja commented on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026): I looked closer and indeed - you're right! When collaborators returned to the stable baseline after a transient glitch, the code cleared the pending entry, but didn't suppress the notification. It then compared the current count (1) to the previous snapshot (0) and sent a false notification. I'll fix it.

kerem commented

2026-02-27 20:07:43 +03:00

Author

Owner

@misiektoja commented on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026):

Ok, it was quick, hopefully it is fixed now!

@misiektoja commented on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026): Ok, it was quick, hopefully it is fixed now!

kerem commented

2026-02-27 20:07:43 +03:00

Author

Owner

@tomballgithub commented on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026):

Thanks. I'll close

@tomballgithub commented on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026): Thanks. I'll close

No labels

Stale

enhancement

pull-request

No milestone

No project

No assignees

1 participant

Notifications

Due date

The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference

starred/spotify_profile_monitor#17

No description provided.

Rows
Columns