OK, asking what you guys think here.
I've got a pull (change) request that came in on Github for the provider azlyrics.com. Apparently that site changed their site coding and this change is needed to match lyrics.
A pull request is basically when a user updates the code and then asks to have their code integrated into the project. (Thanks to whoever did this by the way). Here is the updated code.
delete this:
pattern: ['<!-- start of lyrics -->(?<lyrics>.+?)<!-- end of lyrics -->', s]
and add this:
pattern: ['<!-- Usage of azlyrics.com content by any third-party lyrics provider is prohibited by our licensing agreement. Sorry about that. -->(?<lyrics>.+?)<!-- MxM banner -->', s]
Now, I'm pretty sure this is related to other websites that purport to be lyrics providers scraping and using the lyrics. Technically, I guess, reading it very literally, the plug-in is not a "lyrics provider" It retrieves lyrics just like a web browser would with everything else around the lyrics stripped out.
But beyond what it literally says, I'm trying to decide if the spirit of the warning is that the plug-in should not be using az as a source any longer. I don't want to retrieve their lyrics if they don't want their lyrics retrieved this way - if they just want people going to their web site to get them. That's their content.
The inner debate I'm having is whether the plug-in is a "third party" or whether the end-user using the plug-in is a "second party" no matter how they get the lyrics.
So what does everyone think?
My options are to:
1. Leave it broken and anyone who wants to make a YML for themselves to make it work can use the code above to do that just like any other source.
2. Update it and make it work - maybe or maybe not against their wishes
3. Delete the source and anyone who wants to make a YML for themselves to make it work can use the code above to do that just like any other source.
I'm inclined to delete the source to be on the safe side.