[PD-dev] Naming of patch when doing a "save as"

[Christof Ressi]

> 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" <syntaxerror60 at hotmail.com>
> An: "IOhannes m zmoelnig" <zmoelnig at iem.at>
> Cc: "Pd-dev at lists.iem.at" <Pd-dev at lists.iem.at>
> 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 <zmoelnig at iem.at> 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
> > Pd-dev at lists.iem.at
> > https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-dev mailing list
> Pd-dev at lists.iem.at
> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
>