> Anyway, I think the argument is getting pointless, I made my point and I > think most people on the > list agreed with me, that last saved name is the right starting point for a > “save as”.
Nobody disagreed with you on this. In fact, iohannes already worked on a fix! > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 19. September 2019 um 15:49 Uhr > Von: "jakob skouborg" <[email protected]> > An: "IOhannes m zmoelnig" <[email protected]> > Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Betreff: Re: [PD-dev] Naming of patch when doing a "save as" > > > > no. > > but it's one of the consequences of suggesting a scheme like "copy of > > <orgfile>”. > > But no one suggested to use “copy of CombFilter 1.2”, etc…. > > Next version would be "CombFilter 1.3”. It makes no sense to put this "copy > of” etc. in front of the patchname. > That is out of context, cause no one would do that in real life. > > I simply suggest that instead of starting from “untitled”, one starts from > the last saved name, in this case > "Combfilter 1.2” or it could be “Combfilter1”. It is really not about the > actual name, it is about the starting > point when doing a “save as”. > > How you and anyone else decide to go on from there, do naming of patches is > up to you, I am not judge > of other peoples workflow. > > Anyway, I think the argument is getting pointless, I made my point and I > think most people on the > list agreed with me, that last saved name is the right starting point for a > “save as”. Whatever > people do from there is up to them. Cal it a bug, call it different > behaviour, I am no judge of that. > > Thanks to everyone and I wish you all a good day. > > Best wishes, Jakob > > > > > > > > > On 19 Sep 2019, at 09:31, IOhannes m zmoelnig <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > (one of the problems with this thread is, that i cannot refrain from > > answering...) > > > > On 18.09.19 19:26, jakob skouborg wrote: > >> > >>> the days of "Copy of Copy of Kopie von Comb filter 1.2 (17.12.1997) > >>> final copy.pd" ought to be gone for good. > >> > >> That is not what what I am saying or expecting. > > > > no. > > but it's one of the consequences of suggesting a scheme like "copy of > > <orgfile>". > > all *i* am saying is that i don't want such a scheme. > > > >> > >> It is really very simple, just start from the name of last time the patch > >> was saved, > >> like basically any other app in the world does today. > > > > did you notice that i never said anything against *that*? > > actually, i think it's a pretty sane default (and so far everybody seems > > to agree). > > > >>> if you want to do versioning of patches, you probably should look into a > >>> proper version-control-system, like 'git'. > >>> seriously. > >> > >> > >> I think that is overcomplicating the "save as" function a little bit. > > > > i never said that this should go into the "save as" functionality. > > what i said is that if you want to manage multiple versions of a patch, > > you shouldn't use filenames at all, but look instead look into a system > > that was designed to manage multiple versions of files. > > > >>> i think that the suggestion shouldn't contain spaces at all > > [...]> The name heres was just an example. > > > > <wink> > > so how should we fix the current behaviour if the/a suggested solution > > is "just an example" and bogus? > > </wink> > > > >> Of course I call abstractions something else, without spaces. > >> > >> I am talking about main/master patches. All though you can still call them > >> “Patchname1”, etc. > > > > the thing is, Pd doesn't really differentiate between "main/master > > patches" and "abstractions". > > > >> > >> Anyway, I am just curious about that the rationale is for starting from > >> “untitled”, > >> instead of last saved name? Cause to me it doesn’t make sense at all. > > > > i agree with dan here, that (if it's so annoying to people then ) it's > > simply a bug and should be fixed. > > > > rfgamsrd > > IOhannes > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pd-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev > > _______________________________________________ > Pd-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev > _______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
