Am Dienstag 08 Februar 2011, 23:22:49 schrieb todd rme: > On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 3:58 AM, todd rme <toddrme2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 7:30 AM, Matthias Fuchs <ma...@gmx.net> wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> When moving and copying multiple files it can be quite tedious to make > >> out if there are differences for all these files. > >> > >> > >> > >> ====Use Case:==== > >> You copy hundreds of text files, knowing that most are the same, but not > >> all. Now you are greated with multiple "Do you want to overwrite XY > >> size Z with XY size W" dialogs. > >> > >> ====Proposal==== > >> What I propose is to not show this dialogs if both files are identical, > >> in the case of copying nothing should happen then, while in the case of > >> moving the source file should be deleted. > >> > >> To check if a file is identical this should happen in a two step > >> process: 1. Both file sizes equal and smaller a fixed size > >> 2. Calculating the checksums for both files, the check for the fixed > >> size above avoids long lasting calculations > >> > >> If 1. turns out to be false a dialog should be shown. > >> > >> > >> This could be either opt-in (via a checkbox) or always on with just an > >> information text in the dialog. The hash function should be one that is > >> very fast to calculate and if the file system supports and stores > >> checksums for files those should be used. > >> > >> ====Open Questions + Discussion==== > >> What do you think of this idea, should something like that be > >> implemented? Also what do you think of the Nepomuk Ressources > >> associated with the files? Imagine both files have a different rating, > >> what should happen then? > >> > >>>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to > >>>> unsubscribe << > > > > I posted brainstorm forum idea about this last year: > > > > http://forum.kde.org/brainstorm.php#idea39563_page1 > > > > I proposed a three-stage process, similar to yours but with an extra > > stage, an optional byte-by-byte check. > > > > Checksums are fast for small files, but they can take longer on large > > files and on older systems. They also, as I understand it, are not > > perfect. So I think that a better approach is that, for files under a > > certain size, an automatic three-stage approach is used. First the > > file size check, then checksum, then byte-by-byte. If all of those > > pass, then the file is just deleted. > > > > For slightly bigger files, where the checksum is fast enough but the > > byte-by-byte is not, only the first two stages are used. If they both > > pass, the "File Already Exists" dialog box should be changes to tell > > the user that the files are "probably" the same, and gives them the > > additional option (on top of renaming, overwriting, and skipping) of > > doing an "Exact check" (or something along those lines), which then > > does the byte-by-byte check. If that passes, then the file is > > deleted. > > > > If the file is really big, then even the checksum is not done > > automatically. If the files have the same size, the user is told the > > files have the same size, and the user has the additional options of > > doing a "Quick check" and "Exact check" (checksum and byte-by-byte, > > respectively). If the checksums match, you are back to to the > > previous situation where the user is given the option to do the exact > > check or do one of the standard actions. If the detailed check > > passes, then the file is deleted. > > > > The issue with the nepomuk data is an issue even without this. When > > you are moving files and decide to overwrite conflicting files, even > > if they aren't the same. A simple check box for "merge nepomuk data" > > or "merge tags" or something like that (if they both have data, of > > course) would be very useful independent of this. > > Sorry for dredging up such an old topic, but I was wondering if this > might this make a good GSOC project. > > -Todd > > >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to > >> unsubscribe <<
I just saw your reply now. Personally I don't really think that this should be a GSOC since I believe it would be quite easy to realise. >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
