Subproject / subfolders options and structure #30
Comments
|
Hi there, I know it's not a folder system, but maybe it can solve your usecase. Please explore that feature, and I'm more than happy to discuss further improvements to the platform |
EduardoOliveira
added
documentation
|
Good call. I'm not really a fan of "tag-heavy" environments and I'd prefer a structure folder, but that is just my personal taste. Thanks for the feedback! |
|
There was another discussion about subfolders on discord, and I would like some feedback on possible future implementation. Please take a look at the general chat around the date of this post.
Let's talk about the expected behavior of having folders within projects.
Further considerations. Comments and feedback is welcome as always. |
|
Any thoughts of tags for the actual models, rather than at the project level? I may have projects that have pre-supported and unsupported models, projects that have models of bases, figures, terrain, vehicles, etc, or models with different sizes. I like the idea of automatically assigning tags based on folders but having them flow down to actually tag the model would be much more useful for filtering. |
|
I just installed MMP and trying to figure it out. The first project I tried to import was: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/arenpi/the-desert-guest-house "1- Every folder directly beneath the library folder would be a project if within its tree there is a file of any kind." "2- Folders within a project that don't contain files are ignored." "3- Folders within a project that contain files show up in the UI as folder." "4- Folders within a folder that also contains files are shown at the same level as those files."
"5- Folders within a project that have no files but contain folders with files are not shown in the UI." Altough I'm not sure if I would do this with simpler projects, e.g. a person with 3 head options, I would properly just put them in one folder and call the files 'Body', 'Head_A', 'Head_B,' Head_C' |
|
I'm currently, slowly, writing a "V2" of the project, where I dropped the concept of project, everything is an asset, being it a file asset (multiple subtypes) , or a folder asset, all assets have tags for easier search, the project concept would appear as a property of a folder asset, that would show it in a project view. |
|
Hi, I would love for you guys to give a try to the agent:v2 image, it's not close to ready but many of the concepts that were discussed in therms of files system are now implemented, and I really would love some feedback.... One of the changes is that bundle files (3mf, zip, rar, possibly more, let me know) are now treated similarly to a folder, the discovery routine maps its insights, and in the UI you can choose to extract each contained file. That said, it created a new behavior, extracting the files makes them siblings of the bundle in the real filesystem.
I would truly appreciate some feedback and if possible some sample file structures to replicate and feel locally. Please check out https://github.com/Maker-Management-Platform/agent/tree/v2 |
hi! tried to run v2 with just couple of files to test - unfortunately can't start it :( |
|
I forgot to document, the url should be ip:8000/lib, I just pushed a new version with a nav bar |
thanks for the hint, I thought I need to use the mmp-ui container to get to the ui ;) regarding the structure - this probably is what I was hoping for when running the "regular" [not v2] version, meaning: the ui mirrors folder structure on disk. so it looks very promising, just maybe it needs to other distinction between files and folders [other than a "dir - dir" comment, but like I said - I guess layout/design is in early stage]. like many others, I've got a structure similar to this:
not all projects/groups has all branches deep, but sometimes I need to add more just to know what is what ;) my testing structure is in the attachement :) IMO it's represented in v2 much better [folders and subfolders] than in v1 [tags]. |
|
Thanks a lot for the feedback, I'll I've that structure a spin soon. The dir - dir is actually, asset kind (dir, model, image, slice, ... Configurable in settings) - node kind ( file, dir, Bundle if is a zip 3mf rar, bundled if it's contained within a bundle and can be extracted) that will become some kind of icon at this point is mostly for tracking |
|
Sorry for the delay, I'll give the new version (v2) a try in the next days and I'll provide feedback from my side as soon as possible! Thanks! |
|
I had similar problems like @pejotigrek . ;) Actually I could copy and paste @pejotigrek comment, every single bit.
The only thing I have noticed, is that you are flattening the content of compressed files. Is this deliberate? Looks promising. Thank you. |
|
Hi @Borbarad2k1, currently, yes its deliberate, it simplefies things. But thats the kind of feedback i'm looking. how would you see that working? Also I recoment docker pulling the V2 on every day of testing, since I've been doing some chages, for instance the UI is a bit less cluthered @pejotigrek xD |
|
Hi, @EduardoOliveira As a user I would expect a bundle file is like a folder and it behaves like this, including the folder structure. The only exception: I would not allow "manipulating" the bundle file, like creating folders, or copying/moving files INTO the bundle file and so on. I can see that some people would like to have a decomrpess feature either during upload or later. For me personally, it's about saving storage space. I understand, that sometimes it's necessary to decompress files for internal usage, like creating thumbnails or something similar. This could happen e.g. in a maintained cache folder. |
|
Currently I'm only extracting a single image from the bundle to make the thumbnail, and not processing any of the bundled assets, so no thumbnails for the contained assets, would it make sense to render the bundled assets? The generated assets will be a fraction of the bundle content. but still... this thread choses... |
|
Hm good question... But maybe a user does not want MMP to scrape the content of the bundle?! What about, asking the user when he accesses a bundle? |
|
There could be a global setting for precessing bundles by default, or a button by bundle to process individually. I'll go with it |
|
Update: now the bundles integrate better within the file three, you can choose or not to render assets within the bundle, and chose or not to extract the images to use as thumbnail, all of this is done in memory, so the models are not extracted during discovery, but you'll be able to download/see in the 3d viewer, a temp folder is being used to store this kind of transient data, so you can just clean up without breaking stuff. Also, internally I'm using a file system abstraction that allows me to treat zips and whatnot as normal fs, but, there are also drivers to treat S3, git and others in the same manner, this will not be treated as priority but shouldn't be hard to implement. When you have the time, feedback is appreciated. To add multiple libraries just add multiple file system entries in the config file, the /library as default still applies |
|
Hi there, I've just published an update to the V2 branch. With all that, I would kindly ask for your very important feedback :) |
|
Sorry for the delay in the feedback! So, I've managed to play a little around with V2, and from my side, with the little I've played I'd say it's looking good, even if I've found a weird behaviour, I'll try to explain. So far I've tested with a similar structure:
So far, the models under the first category are correctly displayed (both of them) while in the second category I got only the first one displayed, the second one is not even displayed under the library. In the logs I'm getting the following
Where:
Which is clearly present on the filesystem. At first I suspected it was an issue with the file itself as moving it under the first category made the whole "Category 2" disappear, but I've got the same result also with a different zip file, while others are working fine. Let me know if you need more details or logs in order to troubleshoot this one. Anyway, I like the structure of V2 and it's basically was I was looking for! Thanks for the great work so far! |
|
Do you have a zip within a zip? I might have skipped that usecase xD |
Yep! On my current library / storage this is quite common as often inside the initial zip there is a secondary (or multiple) zip files (such as presupported models and so on). While Thingiverse has zip > files and images folders, it's quite common for models downloaded from Cults3d to have a zip within a zip, at least for the models I'm looking for this happens quite often :D |
|
New commit, with zips inside zips inside zips inside zips inside zips inside zips.... This was a fun one xD |
I've not performed an accurate round of testing, but from the initial look seems to be fixed now! Thanks! |
|
I think the next steps will be stabilizing the UI for an initial release candidate. |
|
Personal preference? I'd say the settings menu would be nice and has my vote. Oh by the way, with the zip inside zip thing, I believe the issue #29 can be considered complete (if you want to close an issue)! |
Hey!
Not sure if this is in scope / it's not what you meant, so feel free to close this.
Basically I've tried loading my whole library into MMP, and while it's working, picking up the models, seems the "Project" structure is a little messed up.
In my case, the library structure is something similar (these are just examples to give you an idea):
During the initial setup, MMP created the relative "Projects" based on the subfolder names and for those containing some files.
Given the above example, it created the projects "Halo", "Warhammer" and so on, but not the "macro" or "parent" project "Cosplay".
Now, I understand that my particular folder structure is... well, mine, but I believe a "sub-project" or "sub-folder" option could be interesting (maybe this could be marked as "feature request"?)
Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: