| |
cba
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 934 |
Release id #102925 : Legion's Intro
<sigh>
Stop using .prg files, I'm getting tired of this, I keep on removing them, instead of somebody just doing it right from the start ;(
|
|
| |
wacek
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 505 |
Some facts:
1. The first release that was "not done right from the start" is id=12 Sauerkraut 89 so I guess I agree - it was not done right from the start... of the database.
2. At the moment there are 8000+ entries in csdb with .prg files.
3. On the C64 FTPs out there, there are 80.000+ files in form of long-name PRG's. I'd personally risk saying that it has become some standard over time.
Some questions.
1. Can you stop pretending like I'm the biggest source of problem here - as almost everyone's doing it? Recent one-filed releases from all major groups are in prg form, somehow you're not bothered...
2. Let's have an open discussion about it (how about a survey around users?) on who's bothered by that. Take into account that maybe the rules are not catching up with the scene reality around it, not the other way around. You know, those are not ten commandments in stone ;)
3. It is (quote) a measure to preserve original filenames (unquote). What is the point if there is nothing to preserve? I have those as PRGs, I may wrap'em in D64 but what's the added value? Beside the fact that it's me wasting my time instead of you wasting yours, and we're both wasting diskspace and bandwidth?
(and I am hoping for a civilized, adult discussion here :D) |
| |
Digger
Registered: Mar 2005
Posts: 422 |
Haha, .PRG files not acceptable? First time I hear about this :) Why not?
Personally, I dont like the idea of wrapping everything in a .d64 unless preserving the filename is crucial (but is it ever?) |
| |
wacek
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 505 |
PRG's are "not welcome", it is written so in the rules, Digger.
Somehow when Offence (sorry guys, a randomly chosen group, really) uploads their new filedemo as PRG it's ok. At the same time, my PRGs are "horrible". Hurray for double standards! :) |
| |
cba
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 934 |
Quote: PRG's are "not welcome", it is written so in the rules, Digger.
Somehow when Offence (sorry guys, a randomly chosen group, really) uploads their new filedemo as PRG it's ok. At the same time, my PRGs are "horrible". Hurray for double standards! :)
No double standards, it would be much better is Offence also would upload a .d64 file instead of a .prg file.
The difference is that their demo is new and so they decide on how to name it, not much I can do about that.
Stuff like the Legion's Intro which is old is taken off a .d64 file by you as .prg file.
That is a whole different story, there you should preserve the file name as it was.
Get it ?
Not so difficult ain't it ;-)
|
| |
cba
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 934 |
Quote: Some facts:
1. The first release that was "not done right from the start" is id=12 Sauerkraut 89 so I guess I agree - it was not done right from the start... of the database.
2. At the moment there are 8000+ entries in csdb with .prg files.
3. On the C64 FTPs out there, there are 80.000+ files in form of long-name PRG's. I'd personally risk saying that it has become some standard over time.
Some questions.
1. Can you stop pretending like I'm the biggest source of problem here - as almost everyone's doing it? Recent one-filed releases from all major groups are in prg form, somehow you're not bothered...
2. Let's have an open discussion about it (how about a survey around users?) on who's bothered by that. Take into account that maybe the rules are not catching up with the scene reality around it, not the other way around. You know, those are not ten commandments in stone ;)
3. It is (quote) a measure to preserve original filenames (unquote). What is the point if there is nothing to preserve? I have those as PRGs, I may wrap'em in D64 but what's the added value? Beside the fact that it's me wasting my time instead of you wasting yours, and we're both wasting diskspace and bandwidth?
(and I am hoping for a civilized, adult discussion here :D)
1. The link to TDD has the right file and the best would be to remove the .prg file and upload the file from TDD :)
2. I know, way too much, I also have at TDD still a lot of .prg files that I'm slowly getting rid of, just like I did with .lnx/.lha and 64 zipped files, the idea is to have one standard and to preserve the file name.
3. Check TDD, .prg files are slowly being removed ;), I work on it almost daily.
Question.
1. Your for sure not the only one, there are several others that I've been sending messages to, and as for new releases, well <sigh> not much I can do about that, its their choice and too bad CSDB moderators are not pushing them, they are more occupied with cracks :-)
2. Good idea, set up a survey and see what the outcome would be, I really wonder what will show up, if nobody gives a fuck then I will stop my activities on csdb and just focus on my ftp site.
3. If you really don't have them with a original file name then there is not much what you can do.
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11170 |
what i hate even more than prg files.... are spreaddisks which have been ripped apart. bah =)
and i am with cba there - prg files suck. really, use d64, please. (and only because a lot of people didnt do it before, thats not a good reason to not do it yourself at all) |
| |
wacek
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 505 |
OK then, as suggested, the survey is there, linked in the news on the main page :) Let's hear the voice of the people.
I propose to come back to this discussion in a few days, when we have some results - ok?
http://kwiksurveys.com?u=csdbformats |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11170 |
you can make survey all you want really :) |
| |
Count Zero
Registered: Jan 2003
Posts: 1834 |
I suggest next time using a "survey maker" that also displays the results afterwards :)
D64 is the way to go! |
| |
wacek
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 505 |
I can see the results fine :)
|
| |
Ksubi
Account closed
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 87 |
...and the results will show that we all prefer .d64 :) |
| |
Moloch
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 2906 |
d64 or death
|
| |
Radiant
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 639 |
Modern C64 setups have no problems running RPG files directly without having them on a D64 image first; in fact it's often nothing but an extra step when running the thing. That said it's a minor inconvenience; I think putting onefilers on a D64 is ok in the larger scheme of things, especially if you want to have some directory art.
I don't have any "original filename" to preserve on my own releases, so that point is moot for me. If you want to know what the filename would be if I had made the release as a D64 image instead, just start up c1541, format a new D64 image and copy the PRG file onto it without any specific parameters. |
| |
wacek
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 505 |
50 responses so far, we still need more :) |
| |
Acidchild
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 467 |
sometimes on older files the group-abbreviation is written behind the releasename...this could be interesting for finding other stuff from the same group. when copying only prg files you might lose this information. |
| |
wacek
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 505 |
I usually name the files like "This Is Demo Name - The Sharks" or "Something Something - ARS" :) |
| |
Acidchild
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 467 |
okay, but then you loose the correct abbreviation f.e. [c] or <C> .i'm sure you got all the stuff you upload from real disks or real d64-files, so why don't you keep the d64 as it is and upload it? |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11170 |
"50 responses so far, we still need more :)"
what about "you can make survey all you want" was unclear anyway? =P |
| |
Digger
Registered: Mar 2005
Posts: 422 |
@groepaz: Try it. "You can only answer once from this IP address."
@wackee: you need another option "any of these formats are fine" |
| |
Cresh
Registered: Jan 2004
Posts: 354 |
Ie. "I do not care!", like me.
I do not collect files...
And with onefilers I just drag&drop them, so with prg it is quicker. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11170 |
"@groepaz: Try it. "You can only answer once from this IP address.""
what? the point was: whatever comes out of this survey, it doesnt matter. if perff wants to make a survey on how to run the site, then he will do one, here, right on the site. until then the rules are there, and they exist for a reason. its all about preservation too. |
| |
TPM
Registered: Jan 2004
Posts: 109 |
PRG can be dragged into VICE.. i find that really easy to check something quickly, so i'm not bothered when PRG's are being used. But for preserving-matters D64 is ofcourse the best way to do it, so i say D64 too :) |
| |
Scout
Registered: Dec 2002
Posts: 1568 |
Quote: PRG can be dragged into VICE.. i find that really easy to check something quickly, so i'm not bothered when PRG's are being used. But for preserving-matters D64 is ofcourse the best way to do it, so i say D64 too :)
D64's can also be dragged into Vice.
The point is all about preservation: with PRG's you can't preserve the original, intended filename (PETSCII included).
In D64's you can. |
| |
Cresh
Registered: Jan 2004
Posts: 354 |
But it loads "*",8,1 which is ok in 80% cases, but could also load junk.
|
| |
Scout
Registered: Dec 2002
Posts: 1568 |
Quote: But it loads "*",8,1 which is ok in 80% cases, but could also load junk.
Whatever.
The main and most important message in my post was the preservation bit.
What always seems to be forgotten is that preservation is the core purpose of this CSDb.
Endless bitching about <insert your favorite topic here> seems to overshadow that purpose every once in a while.
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11170 |
indeed. that btw means that is 100% irrelevant how convinient it is to doubleclick on a file. |
| |
Count Zero
Registered: Jan 2003
Posts: 1834 |
Actually just coming up with "easier to handle for the real machine" and "better to start with VICE" as justification for PRG makes me *fp* (and I only have like 10 or so different VICE startup commands with varying configs)
Whenever you upload your own material nobody will complain about .prg being your choice, but loosing any character or formatting from the originally chosen filename(s) of a third party production is definately critical. No need to argue about that at all as ppl pointed out very well already.
PS: and we also want to be able to rant on possible spelling mistakes the original namecreator probably did. :)
|
| |
Digger
Registered: Mar 2005
Posts: 422 |
What if I create and compile my one file one-file demo entirely on non-C64 machine? Then "the preservation" bit is entirely irrelevant. Uploading .prg would be perfectly valid in this case.
So, how about being a bit more constructive and ask or "remind" the user to upload .d64 if possible (giving the reasons for preservation) but ultimately leave it open for own releases. Sighing and moaning "read the rules" doesn't really help engaging the users ;-)
@moderators: You seem to take CSDB very personally, how about being a bit more open to users' suggestions? :D |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11170 |
your own release you can obviously name as you want. this is all about other peoples (usually old) releases.
and yes, just like on every other website, those who run the site also make the rules. and like on every other website they implement those ideas from users that they like, and ignore the ideas which they think are bad.
as for reminding, go back to the first post =P |
| |
wacek
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 505 |
@Groepaz.
After the survey is finished, I'll send the results to the admins, for their consideration. Whatever happens, happens. I don't have any power here, but I'm still allowed to express my opinion backed by the survey, right?
@Scout.
As far as preservation goes, common sense tells me it's more important to preserve the content than the form. People don't get excited at demoparties watching PETSCII filenames (the only exception of course being my stylish dir designs, hehe). Also, stop bitching about others sharing a viewpoint that is different from yours which you consider bitching ;)
@Acidchild.
I understand your point, I really do. But you're also making an assumption that is wrong. I started transferring and collecting before there was csdb, in the era of DOS 8.3 filenames, therefore my typical dir looks something like this:
2000-08-29 10:51 174˙848 7YEARS.D64
2011-11-23 18:51 0 a.txt
2000-07-09 01:09 174˙848 ANALIN#1.D64
2000-07-09 01:10 174˙848 ANALIN#2.D64
1998-02-24 19:09 40˙075 ANALSCAN.PRG
2000-07-09 01:06 174˙848 ATTACKO2.D64
2000-07-09 00:22 174˙848 ATTACKO3.D64
2000-07-09 01:18 174˙848 ATTACKOF.D64
2000-07-09 00:18 18˙318 CHARLATA.PRG
2000-07-09 01:09 174˙848 DEJAVU.D64
2000-07-09 00:17 49˙227 DEMONOMA.PRG
2000-07-09 00:18 16˙917 GALLUP88.PRG
2000-07-09 01:10 11˙172 HOLYSPI4.PRG
2000-07-08 23:50 43˙337 INSANITY.PRG
2000-07-09 01:08 11˙857 LETKU.PRG
2000-07-09 00:19 174˙848 MEETIN97.D64
2000-07-09 01:10 174˙848 MORPHOSI.D64
2000-07-09 01:12 174˙848 MYSTIC.D64
1998-03-13 10:20 5˙303 NEWINTRO.PRG
2000-07-09 01:08 7˙719 NOBLITTE.PRG
2000-07-09 01:12 174˙848 NOTHINGB.D64
2000-07-09 01:13 174˙848 OHNOMORE.D64
1998-02-24 15:58 25˙948 ONEYEAR.PRG
2000-07-09 00:18 27˙145 OPERABLE.PRG
2000-07-09 01:07 174˙848 PARTYTRA.D64
2000-07-09 00:18 13˙659 SOLOACID.PRG
2000-07-08 23:49 17˙968 SPLITTER.PRG
2000-08-29 10:50 174˙848 STUBIDO.D64
2000-08-29 10:51 174˙848 STUBIDO2.D64
2000-07-09 00:17 11˙541 TOUCHY.PRG
2000-08-29 10:51 174˙848 TYPICAL.D64
2001-07-27 09:42 1˙684 WARELIST
...So no, in many cases I don't have the original PETSCII names, I have just full names typed in the above WARELIST file. Maybe my choice in 199x to do it this way was stupid, but unless you can lend me a time machine...
Of the choice: a) upload it as PRG because it's not there yet, or b) don't upload an entry because the PETSCII is not there anymore - I choose a) anyday. And putting them back into D64/T64, what is preserved? Nothing.
@all.
I'm not replacing anyone's files with PRGs. I'm just upping things that are not in the db, or fixing the corrupted ones, with the source files that I have. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11170 |
Quote:After the survey is finished, I'll send the results to the admins, for their consideration. Whatever happens, happens. I don't have any power here, but I'm still allowed to express my opinion backed by the survey, right?
do whatever you feel like :) keep in mind though that the admins only care about the technical aspects of the site, and the rest is maintained by the moderators. (and i really wonder why they even tolerate something like this.... oh well =P) |
| |
Digger
Registered: Mar 2005
Posts: 422 |
ANALSCAN.PRG sounds interesting. I think some people should undergo this procedure ;P |
| |
wacek
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 505 |
Anal Scanner by Beyond Force :) |
| |
Adam
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 321 |
using disk images to preserve stuff is far better than having prg files, and for me personally, that's a good thing. When I want to run them on my real machine I need to put the prg's into a D64 image anyway so I can write them onto a blank floppy. disk images are best ;]
|
| |
Rough
Account closed
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1829 |
I suggest next time using a "survey maker" coded on the C64 and uploaded as .prg
Seriously, I'm absolutely + CBA, 16 chars filenames are standard on the 64 (exception tape files), this is not CESDb. Figure what 'E' stands for... Hint: One starts with V, another with CC.
Gangsta's Paradise (the former? Chromance ftp) has got a lot of .prg files as these were uploaded very long time ago, partly in the 90s, when people just wanted the files, slowly I changed them to zipped .t64 and .d64 ones. But I stopped working on GP for no time and Lion being a prick. |
| |
bugjam
Registered: Apr 2003
Posts: 2519 |
While I fully agree that the original filename should be preserved, I am not sure if it really makes sense to put them into a .d64 if they are _only_ available as .prg - at least with regards to the filename history. The .prg's might have been renamed at some point to a filename longer than 12 or 16 characters; the information about the source of a file inside a .d64 is thus lost, if the .prg suffix is cut off when copying the file into the image. This could lead to the wrong assumption that a filename is original, while it isn't. But it is getting very academical here - kind of like that, though. :-) Personally I also uploaded (zipped) .prgs if my own source was already a .prg. If I convert from physical disk, I use of course .d64.
So while I agree with the general notion of preferring images over prgs, I support wackee's point in uploading prgs if there is no physical source, with a rather different argument.
I think convenience is not a point at all here, but I think we more or less all agree on that. :-) |
| |
wacek
Registered: Nov 2007
Posts: 505 |
Here are the results (no increase in votes in recent weeks so it makes no point to continue with it :D). You may of course consider them inconclusive, since only 80 ppl took time to do it.
The way I'd read them is that PRG should not be the preferred format (D64 is clearly the way to go), however a smart way of reflecting the reality would be making it AN ACCEPTABLE OPTION within the database, not a 'discouraged' format. Doesn't that make just a little bit of sense in the view of the results? ;)
I'll forward this to the mods & admins in a few minutes. Whatever happens, happens ;)
 |
