Author Topic: Testing build #100  (Read 29608 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rejetto

  • Administrator
  • Insane programmer
  • *
  • Posts: 12852
    • View Profile
Testing build #100
« on: May 05, 2007, 01:54:49 PM »
download www.rejetto.com/temp/hfs100.exe

what's new...
Code: [Select]
+ Folder archive
- "Allowed referer..." now hidden in easy mode

Offline Flynsarmy

  • Experienced poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 92
  • DENIED!
    • View Profile
    • Flynsarmy
Re: Testing build #100
« Reply #1 on: May 05, 2007, 02:04:12 PM »
How does folder archiving work? Does it create a file on your comp that is the same file size as the files in the folder put together?

Eg if you had 30gb of videos in a folder and someone tried to download the folder, would your comp create a redundant 30gb file?

Offline TSG

  • Operator
  • Insane poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1934
    • View Profile
    • RAWR-Designs
Re: Testing build #100
« Reply #2 on: May 05, 2007, 02:11:17 PM »
Nice, works perfectly so far for me, only problems i can see is if someone will have the ability to download all my files at once... we need a template symbol like the upload section where we can 'restrict archived downloading' to different folders. :)

And when we set a folder to archived downloading 'on', a section %folder-archive% will no longer be null for that folder :) or something...
« Last Edit: May 05, 2007, 02:56:23 PM by That_Stevens_Guy »

Offline rejetto

  • Administrator
  • Insane programmer
  • *
  • Posts: 12852
    • View Profile
Re: Testing build #100
« Reply #3 on: May 05, 2007, 05:54:14 PM »
Nice, works perfectly so far for me, only problems i can see is if someone will have the ability to download all my files at once...

he could do it anyway by using any downloader... so, what's the gain in restricting this capability?

Offline rejetto

  • Administrator
  • Insane programmer
  • *
  • Posts: 12852
    • View Profile
Re: Testing build #100
« Reply #4 on: May 05, 2007, 05:55:17 PM »
How does folder archiving work?

it's a virtual file. it never exists. every piece of it is built on demand and discarded after sending.
it's one of the coolest things i ever programmed ;D

Offline TSG

  • Operator
  • Insane poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1934
    • View Profile
    • RAWR-Designs
Re: Testing build #100
« Reply #5 on: May 05, 2007, 06:13:44 PM »
well, in my case i do not have very high bandwidth (256kbps upstream), so i would not like someone archiving a folder without my permission and hogging all my bandwidth for hrs on end, even if its a registered user... also in flynsarmy's case, his uploads count towards his limit, so if he leaves his image gallery open and goes to uni and finds someone has gone and downloaded a few hundred mb cause they archived his entire collection... get what im saying? we need the ability to disable the feature on some folders, and be able to assign accounts to archiving :) for bandwidths sake  :D
« Last Edit: May 05, 2007, 06:21:24 PM by That_Stevens_Guy »

Offline rejetto

  • Administrator
  • Insane programmer
  • *
  • Posts: 12852
    • View Profile
Re: Testing build #100
« Reply #6 on: May 05, 2007, 06:16:01 PM »
you didn't answer to my objection

Pearl051

  • Guest
Re: Testing build #100
« Reply #7 on: May 05, 2007, 06:23:53 PM »
you didn't answer to my objection

Agreed he didnt. One answer could be that most users are not technical enough to know about Teleport Pro or other site downloaders. So it could work on them. Other than that yeah it seems like a waste of programming effort. I would rather see that time go towards something else.

Offtopic: Really nice tool! I used the earlier versions long time ago and today I needed something similar so I checked out the site. Much improved  ;D thx.

Offline rejetto

  • Administrator
  • Insane programmer
  • *
  • Posts: 12852
    • View Profile
Re: Testing build #100
« Reply #8 on: May 05, 2007, 06:26:59 PM »
If he doesn't want to "give" too much data, he should put some limit, and if the limit doesn't exist, maybe we should create them.

problems require real solutions...not just masturbation ;)

Offline TCube

  • Insane poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 445
    • View Profile
Re: Testing build #100
« Reply #9 on: May 05, 2007, 06:35:46 PM »
Regarding use of downloaders some limits already existed,  am I right ? 
i.e max "simultaneous download from a single Ip adress"
that way no complete directory could be sent in one go ...
Make it idiot-proof and I will make a better idiot

Offline TSG

  • Operator
  • Insane poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1934
    • View Profile
    • RAWR-Designs
Re: Testing build #100
« Reply #10 on: May 05, 2007, 06:37:54 PM »
lol well i just think having the button visible, which is something i'd like to do, would be a lot more tempting than to go 'right click > download all with download manager'.... maybe just give the ability to assign accounts to the archive feature for each folder... :-\ my main concern is just bandwidth usage... i know a download manager can do the same thing... but at least if you decide to boot them the files they have already are intact... and they wont come back to try again for them... i already have 3 IP's banned because they kept trying to come back and download all of my images in a folder with a download manager...

This leads to another question, does the archiver work in a way that the downloader can stop the download and it will cancel the last file then save... or is it one constant file that can hog bandwidth for long amounts of time and if they accidentally cancel halfway its a failed archive (if say there was 200mb in a folder)? which will lead them to try to download yet again and use more bandwidth time...

Anyhoo... sleeptime, i will add this new feature to my template code tomorrow :D

Offline rejetto

  • Administrator
  • Insane programmer
  • *
  • Posts: 12852
    • View Profile
Re: Testing build #100
« Reply #11 on: May 05, 2007, 06:43:07 PM »
Regarding use of downloaders some limits already existed,  am I right ? 
i.e max "simultaneous download from a single Ip adress"
that way no complete directory could be sent in one go ...

you are wrong, that limit will never block you from downloading the whole folder, nor it will slow you in any way.
you will just download files in sequence, that's just what you would do with the folder archive.

Offline TCube

  • Insane poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 445
    • View Profile
Re: Testing build #100
« Reply #12 on: May 05, 2007, 06:47:44 PM »
never used before but now I see... that won't do ...tough !  ;D
Make it idiot-proof and I will make a better idiot

Offline rejetto

  • Administrator
  • Insane programmer
  • *
  • Posts: 12852
    • View Profile
Re: Testing build #100
« Reply #13 on: May 05, 2007, 08:11:17 PM »
the archive download is resumable.
of course as long as you don't change the content of the folder, because it would change the archive itself.

The point here is deciding if i should spend time working on this request that will complicate the GUI with new commands. Adding commands to the account is more feasible, because accounts have few commands, the GUI would not get crowed. You get the point?
We already have tens commands for folders, so we must be careful adding new.
Anyway, nothing was decided yet.

Offline rejetto

  • Administrator
  • Insane programmer
  • *
  • Posts: 12852
    • View Profile
Re: Testing build #100
« Reply #14 on: May 05, 2007, 08:13:41 PM »
i agree with the fact that a nice link to download it all can be tempting.
but there can be other ways, like asking for a confirmation with a warning message, or maybe other things.