Talk:QTGMC 3.32 source
From Avisynth wiki
(Difference between revisions)
Raffriff42 (Talk | contribs) (expanded my first post for clarity) |
Raffriff42 (Talk | contribs) m (Category:Talk) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | [[Category:Talk]] | ||
==== What's the best way to upload script source code ==== | ==== What's the best way to upload script source code ==== | ||
* Method 1: upload file as a Media resource.<br> | * Method 1: upload file as a Media resource.<br> | ||
| Line 13: | Line 14: | ||
:Bump to bring to top of the changelog. Sorry about flooding it over the last few days. I'm done for a while. [[User:Raffriff42|Raffriff42]] 22:36, 12 November 2015 (CET) | :Bump to bring to top of the changelog. Sorry about flooding it over the last few days. I'm done for a while. [[User:Raffriff42|Raffriff42]] 22:36, 12 November 2015 (CET) | ||
:Expanded my first post to clarify a bit. [[User:Raffriff42|Raffriff42]] 04:52, 13 November 2015 (CET) | :Expanded my first post to clarify a bit. [[User:Raffriff42|Raffriff42]] 04:52, 13 November 2015 (CET) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::I never thought about that. Yes i see your point. On one hand it's convienient if the user can download the script, instead of copying into notepad and saving it as an avs or avsi. On the other hand it's good to be able to see the history. Another option would be to add the version number in the filename. So that older versions are easily available. What do you think about that one? | ||
| + | ::Btw, please don't call it script source, since it's not sourcecode. It's a script containing (a) script function(s). [[User:Admin|Admin]] 00:30, 15 November 2015 (CET) | ||
| + | :::OK, have moved all ''Category:Script_Source->Scripts'' -- [[User:Raffriff42|Raffriff42]] 00:39, 14 December 2015 (CET) | ||
Latest revision as of 01:53, 14 December 2015
[edit] What's the best way to upload script source code
- Method 1: upload file as a Media resource.
- Method 2: create a new standard page, paste code in PRE block.
I'm not sure. For some recent uploads, I went with Method 2 without thinking too much about it. Now I see Method 1 has been used previously for script uploading. Oops. I can re-upload 'my' files if required.
In Method 2's defense, I think it's easier to track revisions with the standard Wiki history tools.
- Look at File:ChubbyRain.avsi for example. It has been updated several times. Can you see the changes, easily?
- In contrast, look at Caf_source - you can track all the changes using the History tab.
For another thing, note how the Method 2 files are displayed more compactly in Category:Script_source.
There may be other factors which I haven't considered. Thoughts?
Raffriff42 15:10, 12 November 2015 (CET)
- Bump to bring to top of the changelog. Sorry about flooding it over the last few days. I'm done for a while. Raffriff42 22:36, 12 November 2015 (CET)
- Expanded my first post to clarify a bit. Raffriff42 04:52, 13 November 2015 (CET)
- I never thought about that. Yes i see your point. On one hand it's convienient if the user can download the script, instead of copying into notepad and saving it as an avs or avsi. On the other hand it's good to be able to see the history. Another option would be to add the version number in the filename. So that older versions are easily available. What do you think about that one?
- Btw, please don't call it script source, since it's not sourcecode. It's a script containing (a) script function(s). Admin 00:30, 15 November 2015 (CET)
- OK, have moved all Category:Script_Source->Scripts -- Raffriff42 00:39, 14 December 2015 (CET)
