 | | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) I think this is a great idea. How well does it work for primitives and subfiles, though? If this could be done it would really increase ease of use of the tracker. Rather than putting it on the detail page though, I would suggest the Peeron (...) (23 years ago, 15-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) It wouldn't be too hard to apply different zoom amounts, based on the file's subdirectory. It also might be nice to apply some other analysis to the file being displayed - use a different scale/viewpoint for baseplates, zoom in on very small (...) (23 years ago, 15-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) Um I think I hit send too fast because I *was* talking about the list page... the detail page probably should just always show the image but on the list page, let the user toggle. Right now the list page is one big list though, which is very (...) (23 years ago, 15-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
Here's a wacky idea for the detail page. Would anyone be interested in a java applet on the page where they could actually zoom in/out and rotate the part without DownLoading the Dat, or starting any other tools? I'm not sure how different this (...) (23 years ago, 15-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Technic Gears
|
|
The 24 and 40 tooth gears in my MLCad system are described as needing more work. I've got all the updates loaded and have run mklist. Are these parts being worked on? I hate to ask for this kind of thing, but I've had my head buried in the RCX for (...) (23 years ago, 15-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(I thought I'd replied to this already, maybe I forgot to click Post? Or maybe this will be a duplicate...) (...) Ah, ok. That makes sense. (...) Yes and no. Serving up 500+ images on a single page could be considered counter-productive. I (...) (23 years ago, 15-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) Probably. Depends on how big (bytes) it is. And what (if anything) needs to be specially installed on the user's machine (I'm fairly ignorant about java applets). And how powerful it is. (...) If it runs in the browser, it would be noticeably (...) (23 years ago, 15-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote: > In lugnet.cad, Kyle McDonald writes: > >>Here's a wacky idea for the detail page. >> >>Would anyone be interested in a java applet on the page where they >>could actually zoom in/out and rotate the part without DownLoading >>the (...) (23 years ago, 15-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) I thought a java applet doesn't have access to the local file system for security reasons. A java application on the other hand can access the current local parts library, but you can't run that from a browser without jnlp or something like (...) (23 years ago, 15-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) It can access the local filesystem if the user grant it permission to do so. Signing the applet can help with this also. The Java WebStart/JNLP thing is another alternative that I might explore. It would allow the user to start the application (...) (23 years ago, 15-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) Yes, all the individual files are available. Getting a zipped version would require looking at two or three different files (sort of--I'm ignoring that rogue "linux downloadable", that doesn't play by the rules). Steve (23 years ago, 15-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) I suppose we should get back to figuring out an appropriate agreement that makes packaging (and thus also downloading) the whole parts library in a single file "non-rogue". Jacob (who is guilty of creating the rogue "linux downloadable") (23 years ago, 15-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Technic Gears
|
|
(...) There's a new version of the 24 tooth on the parts tracker here (URL) but not certified yet. You'll need to download all the required sub-parts, too. Use at yer own risk! ROSCO (23 years ago, 15-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) I forgot to mention - the files total to several megabytes - not something you want to redownload every time the applet starts up. (...) *sigh* yes, we should. Steve (23 years ago, 16-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) Yes. Even if you had to go back and forth one part at a time, it would be better than having to download the DAT file each time. I hear you about not downloading 500 images but there is a lot to be said for Peeron and the contemplative power (...) (23 years ago, 16-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) I was thinking it could work like Peeron's [ref] links, and pop up another window. Not a great solution, but easier than having to remember to right-click the hyperlink all the time (IMO). (...) I agree. But I think (and I could be wrong) that (...) (23 years ago, 16-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) And thinking about it, I don't really think images for sub-parts & primitives would be super useful - generally these would be certified in conjunction with a part which references them, no? ROSCO (23 years ago, 16-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) Yep, that's the right place to focus. I think Rosco may be right too, subpart images are not as useful. Does that cut the volume down at all usefully, though? (23 years ago, 16-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) Sort of. Primitives should stand alone, and not be considered intimately tied to the file(s) which use them. And it's still useful to see what the subparts look like, especially when the descriptive title is somewhat undescriptive. Steve (23 years ago, 16-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) There are 139 subparts on the tracker now. I'd say that's a fair percentage of the 661 total files. Another place that I think images would be useful is in the "required files" and "related files" lists on the detailed pages. In those lists, (...) (23 years ago, 16-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) The reason I suggested this is not necessarily volume, but ease - if you limit images to top-level parts, all you need to do is when a part is uploaded, go through your dependency list, and re-image all top-level (non sub-) parts that use it. (...) (23 years ago, 16-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) Yeah, but that would be doing the job of make -- reinventing the wheel, so to speak. It should be easier to maintain a dependency file for each unofficial file, and let make figure out what needs to be updated when. Side thought: Kyle (...) (23 years ago, 17-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | RE: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) In order for make to process stuff properly, I'll need to tell it the order in which directories shold be searched for dependent files because that information is not in the DAT file itself. We need to build different graphic images (and (...) (23 years ago, 17-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) You listed the order correctly. Unofficial/parts, Unofficial/p, Official/parts, Official/p. (...) For now, let's limit ourselves to discussing graphics images. Some of the distribution files *can't* be built on the server -- I haven't found (...) (23 years ago, 17-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) But we already know exactly when an image needs updating! Using make, you still have to decide when to execute the make command, I'm saying the obvious time to do it is when a file is submitted (update it's image and all those which depend on (...) (23 years ago, 18-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) I have to disagree: we don't 'know' exactly when an image needs updating. We have the information needed to figure out which image(s) need updating, but it's in a form that still needs to be sorted through. Sorting through it isn't too hard, (...) (23 years ago, 18-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) What format are the current dependency files in, and when are they updated? ROSCO (23 years ago, 18-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) They're in a tab-delimited text file, each line contains a super-to-subfile dependency, the status of the subfile - official, unofficial, or not found, and the title of the subfile. Like this: parts/3001.dat p/stud.dat official Stud The code (...) (23 years ago, 18-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | RE: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) Steve, I'm kinda busy here this morning, but I'd like to get going on the project soon. For now, I'll do the development offline on my machine, and when I think we're reasonably far along, I'll get acces to the box for testing. Can you send me (...) (23 years ago, 18-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | RE: pictures at tracker
|
|
All, I have finally figured out what the essential character of the job of generating images for the parts tracker boils down to... Here's how I see it. 1. Official parts live in one actual, real file tree 2. Unofficial parts live in another actual, (...) (23 years ago, 19-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) And when do they get generated? My point being, that's the obvious time to generate any images that depend on the part as well. So how I'd see it working is: 1. Author submits part / subpart / primitive. 2. Your script generates dependencies. (...) (23 years ago, 19-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) I put a zip file containing the ldglite sources with the -MSfilepath patch on the sourceforge at: (URL) I had to tweak one line of code to get it to build with the old version of Mesa used on ldraw.org. It should work for Mesa 4.0 and above (...) (23 years ago, 19-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: pictures at tracker
|
|
(...) According to Google it seems to be possible: (URL) will check it out. (...) If you can tell which files were deleted, then make _can_ remove them (`zip -doT archive.zip deleted files`). Jacob (23 years ago, 19-May-02, to lugnet.cad)
|
