Device Wizard: configure device in read-only

Yes, it could be done but I wonder if it worthes the added complexity in code and in UI, what's the use case ?

to forbid Jajuk to change tags and also copy covers in the directory. this is useful when you want to connect a media that you don't own and you want to be sure to not alter it.

also it is to comfort users and let convince them that Jajuk will not touch any files (not like another popular player (keyword hint: apple) completely messing around with filenames and tags)

it could be done by adding a test in all methods performing java.io calls but : - it would add a new option on the device wizard and properties panel, some say that jajuk is complex... - there are *many* of them (to create playlists, covers, tags, reorganize) - it can become complexe if the collection data is store in the device itself (something very waited by users to put all jajuk data + music on a single external disk, see Aero tickets) - it is 99% sure that new developers will forget to check it, even with doc - it looks pretty dirty and error prone on a architecture way, it should be done at the OS level IMO - Jajuk doesn't write anything without that user didn't asked from the UI (like cliking on a save cover button), except about collection data of course. If user think jajuk can mess the device, I 'm not sure the fact of adding a RO option would allay him, some messages in the readme or on the website would make the trick, isn't it ?

It is a marketing value. Jajuk isn't well known (yet), it is to comfort users that do not know Jajuk but want to be sure at 100% that is they try Jajuk, it won't reorganise their music collection or tag files. A lot of players changes users data without telling them! Some users have spend hours to sort/tag/download cover for their albums. User data is important, we don't want to screw with it. I know Jajuk is not doing changing data like that but it is not said during the first use, hence some users may not be confident enough to continue.

To make it simpler for now, we could have the read only feature globally and not per media?

all my previous remarks apply for a global ro too. you may be right but I think this would be better to give this message to users using the we site, let's say in the feature page that implementing something... at least for now...