Loading...
> >

Petition to include version information in the file name.

Joe CotterJoe Cotter Posts: 3,259
edited December 1969 in The Commons

Version information is critical in knowing if what one has locally is up-to-date. Everyone should care about this. If you do, please post your wish here so perhaps DAZ might listen before the new naming convention is cast in stone.

Comments

  • TaozTaoz Posts: 9,940
    edited November 2012

    The new DAZ download manager is supposed to keep you informed about new versions, so it shouldn't be such a big problem.

    Post edited by Taoz on
  • Joe CotterJoe Cotter Posts: 3,259
    edited November 2012

    I don't know as yet how it works nor if it will work for me. I repackage all of my zip files so I don't have to reorder things a second time if I have to reinstall. I know many people do this by watching the forums. How is the installer supposed to keep track of versions if we are repackaging things? There are too many ways this can break and including a version # in the file name is both simple and flexible. I really hope they reconsider.

    Post edited by Joe Cotter on
  • mjc1016mjc1016 Posts: 15,001
    edited December 1969

    I've noticed lots (not all, by any means) of the newer stuff does have version info...something like 'somenumber'_filename_1.x_'somecode'.exe/zip/etc, (code=dc/etc).

    I assume all files start at version 1.0...

  • murgatroyd314murgatroyd314 Posts: 1,517
    edited December 1969

    Taozen said:
    The new DAZ download manager is supposed to keep you informed about new versions, so it shouldn't be such a big problem.

    That will become an acceptable answer after the download manager is actually available. It's been "soon" for half a year now.
  • TaozTaoz Posts: 9,940
    edited December 1969

    Gedd said:
    I don't know as yet how it works nor if it will work for me. I repackage all of my zip files so I don't have to reorder things a second time if I have to reinstall. I know many people do this by watching the forums. How is the installer supposed to keep track of versions if we are repackaging things? There are too many ways this can break and including a version # in the file name is both simple and flexible. I really hope they reconsider.

    The DAZ download manager should include a zip installer as well. I assume it will work with DS, not sure about Poser though.

    Are you repackaging to get rid of the "content" folder?

    In any case, is shouldn't be a big deal to add version number to the zip file, e.g. like this:

    IM00003835_010_the-heart-of-space.zip (version 1.0)
    IM00003835_013_the-heart-of-space.zip (version 1.3)
    IM00003835_115_the-heart-of-space.zip (version 11.5)

    That format should be sufficient, easy to understand, and easy to parse programmatically.

    So I'd vote for that.

  • Joe CotterJoe Cotter Posts: 3,259
    edited November 2012

    I'm repacking because I totally reorganize my files and don't want to have to do it multiple times. Others do this as well as I have seen from forum posts. and they used to use vX.XX format which was fine.

    My workflow when I get something is to install it to a separate folder, reorganize how I want it, then move to the main folder. I then zip the contents of the temp folder so if I have to reinstall that item again it's as easy as double clicking on the zip folder and dropping the contents in the library. Actually, I also include the templates, a url to the item at DAZ, an image or images of item and any notes etc.. in the zip file and delete the now useless readmes (as they point to different locations then where I put things.) I happen to prefer having all of my cameras/lights in a subfolder of the site, textures as subfolders of the item they go to etc... My base sort is to have everything that came together, together. Then I can use categories and/or metadata to sort by other methods.

    Post edited by Joe Cotter on
  • CybersoxCybersox Posts: 9,053
    edited November 2012

    Gedd said:
    Version information is critical in knowing if what one has locally is up-to-date. Everyone should care about this. If you do, please post your wish here so perhaps DAZ might listen before the new naming convention is cast in stone.

    But that would be logical. Logic is a little tweeting bird, chirping in a meadow. Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers which smell baaaad. - Norman 1, head of Store Programming, Mudd's Magento Emporium, Ltd.

    Post edited by Cybersox on
  • Joe CotterJoe Cotter Posts: 3,259
    edited November 2012

    Murgatroyd said:
    Taozen said:
    The new DAZ download manager is supposed to keep you informed about new versions, so it shouldn't be such a big problem.

    That will become an acceptable answer after the download manager is actually available. It's been "soon" for half a year now.

    I would rather not have to rely on some piece of software when a simple vX.xxx in the filename would provide me the information I'm looking for personally.

    Post edited by Joe Cotter on
  • TaozTaoz Posts: 9,940
    edited December 1969

    Gedd said:
    I'm repacking because I totally reorganize my files and don't want to have to do it multiple times. Others do this as well as I have seen from forum posts. and they used to use vX.XX format which was fine.

    My workflow when I get something is to install it to a separate folder, reorganize how I want it, then move to the main folder. I then zip the contents of the temp folder so if I have to reinstall that item again it's as easy as double clicking on the zip folder and dropping the contents in the library. Actually, I also include the templates, a url to the item at DAZ, an image or images of item and any notes etc.. in the zip file and delete the now useless readmes (as they point to different locations then where I put things.) I happen to prefer having all of my cameras/lights in a subfolder of the site, textures as subfolders of the item they go to etc... My base sort is to have everything that came together, together. Then I can use categories and/or metadata to sort by other methods.

    OK, that sounds like a good and (in the long run) time saving strategy. If only it could be automated, but that's probably impossible.

  • Joe CotterJoe Cotter Posts: 3,259
    edited December 1969

    Actually it isn't impossible at all if DAZ had a published standard they stuck to. A tool could be created to unpack, sort according to criteria and repack. The problem is, with the current state of disorganization in the way things are packed it is true, it cannot be automated in any reasonable fashion.

  • TaozTaoz Posts: 9,940
    edited December 1969

    Gedd said:
    Actually it isn't impossible at all if DAZ had a published standard they stuck to. A tool could be created to unpack, sort according to criteria and repack. The problem is, with the current state of disorganization in the way things are packed it is true, it cannot be automated in any reasonable fashion.

    I can only agree - but it's not only a problem with DAZ, but with the whole 3D Content world (or a least the "discount" part of it).

  • Joe CotterJoe Cotter Posts: 3,259
    edited November 2012

    I have to say, DAZ has some great products at good prices. They do good QA on the products. They have great customer service and return policies. As many problems as they have with the site, it is better laid out then any of the others imo. Sometimes they don't get enough credit for what they do right.

    Post edited by Joe Cotter on
Sign In or Register to comment.