Quantcast

Where we store exported "stuff"

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
25 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Where we store exported "stuff"

Peter Sampson-2

NOT for 2.1.3 release.


I was discussing bugs 1304 and 1305 with Mrs S. recently (until a short while ago

she used to be a developer (and tester) in a commercial software company.

When I told her we now made the initial target for exports to be the Documents folder

she queried:
>"Why don't you make Audacity create an Audacity folder immediately under the
>Documents folder?"  i.e.   " ..../Documents/Audacity"


She explained that that is precisely what her company did with the software for its
various products.

 

Now I like this idea because it doesn't just lump all the exports in Documents jumbled

up with whatever the else the user already has in Documents which could be plentiful.


Also it suggests the start of an ordered taxonomy for Audacity filing, encouraging the

user to think a little more about that.


I'm surprised I overlooked thinking about this  when we were recently discussing
bug #1304as this is exactly how I have been operating ever since I started out with using
Audacity.  One of my first actions was to create a folder called "Audacity Projects" in my
Documents folder.

Thanks,
Peter.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Where we store exported "stuff"

Gale
Administrator
Thanks for the suggestion. It does make more sense on Windows,
according to what other applications do on that platform.

I'd be +1. It means nothing more than appending to the three current
sets of strings, AFAICT.  Not my call, but it might make more sense to
change it now if we are going to.


Gale


On 23 January 2017 at 13:14, Peter Sampson
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> NOT for 2.1.3 release.
>
>
> I was discussing bugs 1304 and 1305 with Mrs S. recently (until a short
> while ago
>
> she used to be a developer (and tester) in a commercial software company.
>
> When I told her we now made the initial target for exports to be the
> Documents folder
>
> she queried:
>>"Why don't you make Audacity create an Audacity folder immediately under
>> the
>>Documents folder?"  i.e.   " ..../Documents/Audacity"
>
>
> She explained that that is precisely what her company did with the software
> for its
> various products.
>
>
>
> Now I like this idea because it doesn't just lump all the exports in
> Documents jumbled
>
> up with whatever the else the user already has in Documents which could be
> plentiful.
>
>
> Also it suggests the start of an ordered taxonomy for Audacity filing,
> encouraging the
>
> user to think a little more about that.
>
>
> I'm surprised I overlooked thinking about this  when we were recently
> discussing
> bug #1304as this is exactly how I have been operating ever since I started
> out with using
> Audacity.  One of my first actions was to create a folder called "Audacity
> Projects" in my
> Documents folder.
>
> Thanks,
> Peter.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Where we store exported "stuff"

Stevethefiddle
On Linux, it seems to be fairly common for applications that work with
multi-file "projects" to prompt the user on first run to ask where
they want to save their projects. The prompt will generally default to
something like:
~/Documents/<app-name>-projects/
or
~/<app-name>-projects
The selected directory is then created if it does not exist.

For exporting files I've not seen this type of behaviour on Linux. In
most cases, the default export directory is one of the standard
directories such as "~/" or "~/Documents".

I think that we can leave Linux as it is for now.

Steve

On 23 January 2017 at 14:03, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Thanks for the suggestion. It does make more sense on Windows,
> according to what other applications do on that platform.
>
> I'd be +1. It means nothing more than appending to the three current
> sets of strings, AFAICT.  Not my call, but it might make more sense to
> change it now if we are going to.
>
>
> Gale
>
>
> On 23 January 2017 at 13:14, Peter Sampson
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> NOT for 2.1.3 release.
>>
>>
>> I was discussing bugs 1304 and 1305 with Mrs S. recently (until a short
>> while ago
>>
>> she used to be a developer (and tester) in a commercial software company.
>>
>> When I told her we now made the initial target for exports to be the
>> Documents folder
>>
>> she queried:
>>>"Why don't you make Audacity create an Audacity folder immediately under
>>> the
>>>Documents folder?"  i.e.   " ..../Documents/Audacity"
>>
>>
>> She explained that that is precisely what her company did with the software
>> for its
>> various products.
>>
>>
>>
>> Now I like this idea because it doesn't just lump all the exports in
>> Documents jumbled
>>
>> up with whatever the else the user already has in Documents which could be
>> plentiful.
>>
>>
>> Also it suggests the start of an ordered taxonomy for Audacity filing,
>> encouraging the
>>
>> user to think a little more about that.
>>
>>
>> I'm surprised I overlooked thinking about this  when we were recently
>> discussing
>> bug #1304as this is exactly how I have been operating ever since I started
>> out with using
>> Audacity.  One of my first actions was to create a folder called "Audacity
>> Projects" in my
>> Documents folder.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Peter.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Where we store exported "stuff"

Robert Hänggi
I think it would be appropriate for windows to have this as an
option/question  in the installer.
Same for the manual, instead of providing a separate zip archive, it
would be better to have "Choose the components you want to install".
Robert


2017-01-23 15:41 GMT+01:00, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]>:

> On Linux, it seems to be fairly common for applications that work with
> multi-file "projects" to prompt the user on first run to ask where
> they want to save their projects. The prompt will generally default to
> something like:
> ~/Documents/<app-name>-projects/
> or
> ~/<app-name>-projects
> The selected directory is then created if it does not exist.
>
> For exporting files I've not seen this type of behaviour on Linux. In
> most cases, the default export directory is one of the standard
> directories such as "~/" or "~/Documents".
>
> I think that we can leave Linux as it is for now.
>
> Steve
>
> On 23 January 2017 at 14:03, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Thanks for the suggestion. It does make more sense on Windows,
>> according to what other applications do on that platform.
>>
>> I'd be +1. It means nothing more than appending to the three current
>> sets of strings, AFAICT.  Not my call, but it might make more sense to
>> change it now if we are going to.
>>
>>
>> Gale
>>
>>
>> On 23 January 2017 at 13:14, Peter Sampson
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> NOT for 2.1.3 release.
>>>
>>>
>>> I was discussing bugs 1304 and 1305 with Mrs S. recently (until a short
>>> while ago
>>>
>>> she used to be a developer (and tester) in a commercial software
>>> company.
>>>
>>> When I told her we now made the initial target for exports to be the
>>> Documents folder
>>>
>>> she queried:
>>>>"Why don't you make Audacity create an Audacity folder immediately under
>>>> the
>>>>Documents folder?"  i.e.   " ..../Documents/Audacity"
>>>
>>>
>>> She explained that that is precisely what her company did with the
>>> software
>>> for its
>>> various products.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Now I like this idea because it doesn't just lump all the exports in
>>> Documents jumbled
>>>
>>> up with whatever the else the user already has in Documents which could
>>> be
>>> plentiful.
>>>
>>>
>>> Also it suggests the start of an ordered taxonomy for Audacity filing,
>>> encouraging the
>>>
>>> user to think a little more about that.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm surprised I overlooked thinking about this  when we were recently
>>> discussing
>>> bug #1304as this is exactly how I have been operating ever since I
>>> started
>>> out with using
>>> Audacity.  One of my first actions was to create a folder called
>>> "Audacity
>>> Projects" in my
>>> Documents folder.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Peter.
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Where we store exported "stuff"

Gale
Administrator
In reply to this post by Stevethefiddle
On Mac, my Documents folder is empty, so other applications
apparently don't use it to create their own subfolder.

So we could make the change just for Windows.


Gale


On 23 January 2017 at 14:41, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Linux, it seems to be fairly common for applications that work with
> multi-file "projects" to prompt the user on first run to ask where
> they want to save their projects. The prompt will generally default to
> something like:
> ~/Documents/<app-name>-projects/
> or
> ~/<app-name>-projects
> The selected directory is then created if it does not exist.
>
> For exporting files I've not seen this type of behaviour on Linux. In
> most cases, the default export directory is one of the standard
> directories such as "~/" or "~/Documents".
>
> I think that we can leave Linux as it is for now.
>
> Steve
>
> On 23 January 2017 at 14:03, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Thanks for the suggestion. It does make more sense on Windows,
>> according to what other applications do on that platform.
>>
>> I'd be +1. It means nothing more than appending to the three current
>> sets of strings, AFAICT.  Not my call, but it might make more sense to
>> change it now if we are going to.
>>
>>
>> Gale
>>
>>
>> On 23 January 2017 at 13:14, Peter Sampson
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> NOT for 2.1.3 release.
>>>
>>>
>>> I was discussing bugs 1304 and 1305 with Mrs S. recently (until a short
>>> while ago
>>>
>>> she used to be a developer (and tester) in a commercial software company.
>>>
>>> When I told her we now made the initial target for exports to be the
>>> Documents folder
>>>
>>> she queried:
>>>>"Why don't you make Audacity create an Audacity folder immediately under
>>>> the
>>>>Documents folder?"  i.e.   " ..../Documents/Audacity"
>>>
>>>
>>> She explained that that is precisely what her company did with the software
>>> for its
>>> various products.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Now I like this idea because it doesn't just lump all the exports in
>>> Documents jumbled
>>>
>>> up with whatever the else the user already has in Documents which could be
>>> plentiful.
>>>
>>>
>>> Also it suggests the start of an ordered taxonomy for Audacity filing,
>>> encouraging the
>>>
>>> user to think a little more about that.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm surprised I overlooked thinking about this  when we were recently
>>> discussing
>>> bug #1304as this is exactly how I have been operating ever since I started
>>> out with using
>>> Audacity.  One of my first actions was to create a folder called "Audacity
>>> Projects" in my
>>> Documents folder.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Peter.
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Where we store exported "stuff"

Gale
Administrator
In reply to this post by Robert Hänggi
On 23 January 2017 at 14:54, Robert Hänggi <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I think it would be appropriate for windows to have this as an
> option/question  in the installer.
> Same for the manual, instead of providing a separate zip archive, it
> would be better to have "Choose the components you want to install".

The trouble is that is quite common for knowledgeable users to
need the ZIP file on Windows, notably if they are in some
institutional environment where they don't have privileges to
install anywhere.


Gale

> 2017-01-23 15:41 GMT+01:00, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]>:
>> On Linux, it seems to be fairly common for applications that work with
>> multi-file "projects" to prompt the user on first run to ask where
>> they want to save their projects. The prompt will generally default to
>> something like:
>> ~/Documents/<app-name>-projects/
>> or
>> ~/<app-name>-projects
>> The selected directory is then created if it does not exist.
>>
>> For exporting files I've not seen this type of behaviour on Linux. In
>> most cases, the default export directory is one of the standard
>> directories such as "~/" or "~/Documents".
>>
>> I think that we can leave Linux as it is for now.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> On 23 January 2017 at 14:03, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Thanks for the suggestion. It does make more sense on Windows,
>>> according to what other applications do on that platform.
>>>
>>> I'd be +1. It means nothing more than appending to the three current
>>> sets of strings, AFAICT.  Not my call, but it might make more sense to
>>> change it now if we are going to.
>>>
>>>
>>> Gale
>>>
>>>
>>> On 23 January 2017 at 13:14, Peter Sampson
>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> NOT for 2.1.3 release.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I was discussing bugs 1304 and 1305 with Mrs S. recently (until a short
>>>> while ago
>>>>
>>>> she used to be a developer (and tester) in a commercial software
>>>> company.
>>>>
>>>> When I told her we now made the initial target for exports to be the
>>>> Documents folder
>>>>
>>>> she queried:
>>>>>"Why don't you make Audacity create an Audacity folder immediately under
>>>>> the
>>>>>Documents folder?"  i.e.   " ..../Documents/Audacity"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> She explained that that is precisely what her company did with the
>>>> software
>>>> for its
>>>> various products.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Now I like this idea because it doesn't just lump all the exports in
>>>> Documents jumbled
>>>>
>>>> up with whatever the else the user already has in Documents which could
>>>> be
>>>> plentiful.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Also it suggests the start of an ordered taxonomy for Audacity filing,
>>>> encouraging the
>>>>
>>>> user to think a little more about that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm surprised I overlooked thinking about this  when we were recently
>>>> discussing
>>>> bug #1304as this is exactly how I have been operating ever since I
>>>> started
>>>> out with using
>>>> Audacity.  One of my first actions was to create a folder called
>>>> "Audacity
>>>> Projects" in my
>>>> Documents folder.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Peter.
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Where we store exported "stuff"

Robert Hänggi
On Windows, I've created a standalone disk partition
"Audacity-Projects". Thus, I can save new projects by simply entering
I:\<new>.aup
However, export will open at the same location and my audio files go
most of the time into the documents folder which makes frequent
switching necessary.
That's why I'm looking forward to see different recent folders for
projects and other media types.

Robert

2017-01-23 17:25 GMT+01:00, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]>:

> On 23 January 2017 at 14:54, Robert Hänggi <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> I think it would be appropriate for windows to have this as an
>> option/question  in the installer.
>> Same for the manual, instead of providing a separate zip archive, it
>> would be better to have "Choose the components you want to install".
>
> The trouble is that is quite common for knowledgeable users to
> need the ZIP file on Windows, notably if they are in some
> institutional environment where they don't have privileges to
> install anywhere.
>
>
> Gale
>
>> 2017-01-23 15:41 GMT+01:00, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]>:
>>> On Linux, it seems to be fairly common for applications that work with
>>> multi-file "projects" to prompt the user on first run to ask where
>>> they want to save their projects. The prompt will generally default to
>>> something like:
>>> ~/Documents/<app-name>-projects/
>>> or
>>> ~/<app-name>-projects
>>> The selected directory is then created if it does not exist.
>>>
>>> For exporting files I've not seen this type of behaviour on Linux. In
>>> most cases, the default export directory is one of the standard
>>> directories such as "~/" or "~/Documents".
>>>
>>> I think that we can leave Linux as it is for now.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>>> On 23 January 2017 at 14:03, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> Thanks for the suggestion. It does make more sense on Windows,
>>>> according to what other applications do on that platform.
>>>>
>>>> I'd be +1. It means nothing more than appending to the three current
>>>> sets of strings, AFAICT.  Not my call, but it might make more sense to
>>>> change it now if we are going to.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Gale
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 23 January 2017 at 13:14, Peter Sampson
>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>> NOT for 2.1.3 release.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I was discussing bugs 1304 and 1305 with Mrs S. recently (until a short
>>>>> while ago
>>>>>
>>>>> she used to be a developer (and tester) in a commercial software
>>>>> company.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I told her we now made the initial target for exports to be the
>>>>> Documents folder
>>>>>
>>>>> she queried:
>>>>>>"Why don't you make Audacity create an Audacity folder immediately
>>>>>> under
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>Documents folder?"  i.e.   " ..../Documents/Audacity"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> She explained that that is precisely what her company did with the
>>>>> software
>>>>> for its
>>>>> various products.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Now I like this idea because it doesn't just lump all the exports in
>>>>> Documents jumbled
>>>>>
>>>>> up with whatever the else the user already has in Documents which could
>>>>> be
>>>>> plentiful.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Also it suggests the start of an ordered taxonomy for Audacity filing,
>>>>> encouraging the
>>>>>
>>>>> user to think a little more about that.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm surprised I overlooked thinking about this  when we were recently
>>>>> discussing
>>>>> bug #1304as this is exactly how I have been operating ever since I
>>>>> started
>>>>> out with using
>>>>> Audacity.  One of my first actions was to create a folder called
>>>>> "Audacity
>>>>> Projects" in my
>>>>> Documents folder.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Peter.
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Where we store exported "stuff"

Peter Sampson-2
Given there seems to be some traction for this should we:

a) reopen #1304 as a P4 Enh,
http://bugzilla.audacityteam.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1304

b) add this to #1305,
http://bugzilla.audacityteam.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1305

c) open a new P4 Enh and link to #1304 and #1305 ?

Thanks,
Peter.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Where we store exported "stuff"

Cliff Scott
In reply to this post by Gale
On the Mac it makes more sense to me to put it under Music since recording is either speaking or music.

Cliff

> On Jan 23, 2017, at 10:20 AM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On Mac, my Documents folder is empty, so other applications
> apparently don't use it to create their own subfolder.
>
> So we could make the change just for Windows.
>
>
> Gale
>
>
> On 23 January 2017 at 14:41, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On Linux, it seems to be fairly common for applications that work with
>> multi-file "projects" to prompt the user on first run to ask where
>> they want to save their projects. The prompt will generally default to
>> something like:
>> ~/Documents/<app-name>-projects/
>> or
>> ~/<app-name>-projects
>> The selected directory is then created if it does not exist.
>>
>> For exporting files I've not seen this type of behaviour on Linux. In
>> most cases, the default export directory is one of the standard
>> directories such as "~/" or "~/Documents".
>>
>> I think that we can leave Linux as it is for now.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> On 23 January 2017 at 14:03, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Thanks for the suggestion. It does make more sense on Windows,
>>> according to what other applications do on that platform.
>>>
>>> I'd be +1. It means nothing more than appending to the three current
>>> sets of strings, AFAICT.  Not my call, but it might make more sense to
>>> change it now if we are going to.
>>>
>>>
>>> Gale
>>>
>>>
>>> On 23 January 2017 at 13:14, Peter Sampson
>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> NOT for 2.1.3 release.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I was discussing bugs 1304 and 1305 with Mrs S. recently (until a short
>>>> while ago
>>>>
>>>> she used to be a developer (and tester) in a commercial software company.
>>>>
>>>> When I told her we now made the initial target for exports to be the
>>>> Documents folder
>>>>
>>>> she queried:
>>>>> "Why don't you make Audacity create an Audacity folder immediately under
>>>>> the
>>>>> Documents folder?"  i.e.   " ..../Documents/Audacity"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> She explained that that is precisely what her company did with the software
>>>> for its
>>>> various products.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Now I like this idea because it doesn't just lump all the exports in
>>>> Documents jumbled
>>>>
>>>> up with whatever the else the user already has in Documents which could be
>>>> plentiful.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Also it suggests the start of an ordered taxonomy for Audacity filing,
>>>> encouraging the
>>>>
>>>> user to think a little more about that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm surprised I overlooked thinking about this  when we were recently
>>>> discussing
>>>> bug #1304as this is exactly how I have been operating ever since I started
>>>> out with using
>>>> Audacity.  One of my first actions was to create a folder called "Audacity
>>>> Projects" in my
>>>> Documents folder.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Peter.
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Where we store exported "stuff"

Gale
Administrator
In reply to this post by Robert Hänggi
On 23 January 2017 at 18:20, Robert Hänggi <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Windows, I've created a standalone disk partition
> "Audacity-Projects". Thus, I can save new projects by simply entering
> I:\<new>.aup
> However, export will open at the same location and my audio files go
> most of the time into the documents folder which makes frequent
> switching necessary.

Export path has its own entry in audacity.cfg, so I'm not sure Robert
why export is opening at your partition. Or am I misunderstanding?


Gale


> That's why I'm looking forward to see different recent folders for
> projects and other media types.
>
> Robert
>
> 2017-01-23 17:25 GMT+01:00, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]>:
>> On 23 January 2017 at 14:54, Robert Hänggi <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> I think it would be appropriate for windows to have this as an
>>> option/question  in the installer.
>>> Same for the manual, instead of providing a separate zip archive, it
>>> would be better to have "Choose the components you want to install".
>>
>> The trouble is that is quite common for knowledgeable users to
>> need the ZIP file on Windows, notably if they are in some
>> institutional environment where they don't have privileges to
>> install anywhere.
>>
>>
>> Gale
>>
>>> 2017-01-23 15:41 GMT+01:00, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]>:
>>>> On Linux, it seems to be fairly common for applications that work with
>>>> multi-file "projects" to prompt the user on first run to ask where
>>>> they want to save their projects. The prompt will generally default to
>>>> something like:
>>>> ~/Documents/<app-name>-projects/
>>>> or
>>>> ~/<app-name>-projects
>>>> The selected directory is then created if it does not exist.
>>>>
>>>> For exporting files I've not seen this type of behaviour on Linux. In
>>>> most cases, the default export directory is one of the standard
>>>> directories such as "~/" or "~/Documents".
>>>>
>>>> I think that we can leave Linux as it is for now.
>>>>
>>>> Steve
>>>>
>>>> On 23 January 2017 at 14:03, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>> Thanks for the suggestion. It does make more sense on Windows,
>>>>> according to what other applications do on that platform.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd be +1. It means nothing more than appending to the three current
>>>>> sets of strings, AFAICT.  Not my call, but it might make more sense to
>>>>> change it now if we are going to.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Gale
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 23 January 2017 at 13:14, Peter Sampson
>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>> NOT for 2.1.3 release.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was discussing bugs 1304 and 1305 with Mrs S. recently (until a short
>>>>>> while ago
>>>>>>
>>>>>> she used to be a developer (and tester) in a commercial software
>>>>>> company.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When I told her we now made the initial target for exports to be the
>>>>>> Documents folder
>>>>>>
>>>>>> she queried:
>>>>>>>"Why don't you make Audacity create an Audacity folder immediately
>>>>>>> under
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>Documents folder?"  i.e.   " ..../Documents/Audacity"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> She explained that that is precisely what her company did with the
>>>>>> software
>>>>>> for its
>>>>>> various products.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now I like this idea because it doesn't just lump all the exports in
>>>>>> Documents jumbled
>>>>>>
>>>>>> up with whatever the else the user already has in Documents which could
>>>>>> be
>>>>>> plentiful.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also it suggests the start of an ordered taxonomy for Audacity filing,
>>>>>> encouraging the
>>>>>>
>>>>>> user to think a little more about that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm surprised I overlooked thinking about this  when we were recently
>>>>>> discussing
>>>>>> bug #1304as this is exactly how I have been operating ever since I
>>>>>> started
>>>>>> out with using
>>>>>> Audacity.  One of my first actions was to create a folder called
>>>>>> "Audacity
>>>>>> Projects" in my
>>>>>> Documents folder.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Peter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Where we store exported "stuff"

Gale
Administrator
In reply to this post by Cliff Scott
On 23 January 2017 at 20:31, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On the Mac it makes more sense to me to put it under Music since recording is either speaking or music.

There are a lot of "spoken word artists" on Mac doing professional
narrations and advertising voiceovers. They probably would not
appreciate using "Music".

But it looks like we only want to change to Documents/Audacity on
Windows, if anywhere.


Gale


> Cliff
>
>> On Jan 23, 2017, at 10:20 AM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On Mac, my Documents folder is empty, so other applications
>> apparently don't use it to create their own subfolder.
>>
>> So we could make the change just for Windows.
>>
>>
>> Gale
>>
>>
>> On 23 January 2017 at 14:41, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> On Linux, it seems to be fairly common for applications that work with
>>> multi-file "projects" to prompt the user on first run to ask where
>>> they want to save their projects. The prompt will generally default to
>>> something like:
>>> ~/Documents/<app-name>-projects/
>>> or
>>> ~/<app-name>-projects
>>> The selected directory is then created if it does not exist.
>>>
>>> For exporting files I've not seen this type of behaviour on Linux. In
>>> most cases, the default export directory is one of the standard
>>> directories such as "~/" or "~/Documents".
>>>
>>> I think that we can leave Linux as it is for now.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>>> On 23 January 2017 at 14:03, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> Thanks for the suggestion. It does make more sense on Windows,
>>>> according to what other applications do on that platform.
>>>>
>>>> I'd be +1. It means nothing more than appending to the three current
>>>> sets of strings, AFAICT.  Not my call, but it might make more sense to
>>>> change it now if we are going to.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Gale
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 23 January 2017 at 13:14, Peter Sampson
>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>> NOT for 2.1.3 release.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I was discussing bugs 1304 and 1305 with Mrs S. recently (until a short
>>>>> while ago
>>>>>
>>>>> she used to be a developer (and tester) in a commercial software company.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I told her we now made the initial target for exports to be the
>>>>> Documents folder
>>>>>
>>>>> she queried:
>>>>>> "Why don't you make Audacity create an Audacity folder immediately under
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> Documents folder?"  i.e.   " ..../Documents/Audacity"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> She explained that that is precisely what her company did with the software
>>>>> for its
>>>>> various products.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Now I like this idea because it doesn't just lump all the exports in
>>>>> Documents jumbled
>>>>>
>>>>> up with whatever the else the user already has in Documents which could be
>>>>> plentiful.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Also it suggests the start of an ordered taxonomy for Audacity filing,
>>>>> encouraging the
>>>>>
>>>>> user to think a little more about that.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm surprised I overlooked thinking about this  when we were recently
>>>>> discussing
>>>>> bug #1304as this is exactly how I have been operating ever since I started
>>>>> out with using
>>>>> Audacity.  One of my first actions was to create a folder called "Audacity
>>>>> Projects" in my
>>>>> Documents folder.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Peter.
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Where we store exported "stuff"

Gale
Administrator
In reply to this post by Peter Sampson-2
On 23 January 2017 at 18:27, Peter Sampson
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Given there seems to be some traction for this should we:
>
> a) reopen #1304 as a P4 Enh,
> http://bugzilla.audacityteam.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1304
>
> b) add this to #1305,
> http://bugzilla.audacityteam.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1305
>
> c) open a new P4 Enh and link to #1304 and #1305 ?

I prefer just doing it (for Windows only and if James agrees),
or c).


Gale

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Where we store exported "stuff"

Peter Sampson-2
GAle wrote:
>I prefer just doing it (for Windows only and if James agrees)

I prior discussed this with James before I floated this idea in public.

He approved it then - without that approval I wouldn't have bothered.
We were discussing it for all 3 platforms then, so I have no idea what
his views would be on Windows-only.

Peter

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Where we store exported "stuff"

Gale
Administrator
On 23 January 2017 at 23:22, Peter Sampson
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> GAle wrote:
>>I prefer just doing it (for Windows only and if James agrees)
>
> I prior discussed this with James before I floated this idea in public.
>
> He approved it then - without that approval I wouldn't have bothered.
> We were discussing it for all 3 platforms then, so I have no idea what
> his views would be on Windows-only.

Hopefully he'll tell us...


Gale

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Where we store exported "stuff"

Cliff Scott
In reply to this post by Gale

> On Jan 23, 2017, at 5:06 PM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On 23 January 2017 at 20:31, Cliff Scott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On the Mac it makes more sense to me to put it under Music since recording is either speaking or music.
>
> There are a lot of "spoken word artists" on Mac doing professional
> narrations and advertising voiceovers. They probably would not
> appreciate using "Music".
>
> But it looks like we only want to change to Documents/Audacity on
> Windows, if anywhere.
>
>
> Gale

Could be, but Documents makes no sense to me at all. Some people see it differently than others and it's easy to change.

Cliff

>
>
>> Cliff
>>
>>> On Jan 23, 2017, at 10:20 AM, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mac, my Documents folder is empty, so other applications
>>> apparently don't use it to create their own subfolder.
>>>
>>> So we could make the change just for Windows.
>>>
>>>
>>> Gale
>>>
>>>
>>> On 23 January 2017 at 14:41, Steve the Fiddle <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> On Linux, it seems to be fairly common for applications that work with
>>>> multi-file "projects" to prompt the user on first run to ask where
>>>> they want to save their projects. The prompt will generally default to
>>>> something like:
>>>> ~/Documents/<app-name>-projects/
>>>> or
>>>> ~/<app-name>-projects
>>>> The selected directory is then created if it does not exist.
>>>>
>>>> For exporting files I've not seen this type of behaviour on Linux. In
>>>> most cases, the default export directory is one of the standard
>>>> directories such as "~/" or "~/Documents".
>>>>
>>>> I think that we can leave Linux as it is for now.
>>>>
>>>> Steve
>>>>
>>>> On 23 January 2017 at 14:03, Gale Andrews <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>> Thanks for the suggestion. It does make more sense on Windows,
>>>>> according to what other applications do on that platform.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd be +1. It means nothing more than appending to the three current
>>>>> sets of strings, AFAICT.  Not my call, but it might make more sense to
>>>>> change it now if we are going to.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Gale
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 23 January 2017 at 13:14, Peter Sampson
>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>> NOT for 2.1.3 release.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was discussing bugs 1304 and 1305 with Mrs S. recently (until a short
>>>>>> while ago
>>>>>>
>>>>>> she used to be a developer (and tester) in a commercial software company.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When I told her we now made the initial target for exports to be the
>>>>>> Documents folder
>>>>>>
>>>>>> she queried:
>>>>>>> "Why don't you make Audacity create an Audacity folder immediately under
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> Documents folder?"  i.e.   " ..../Documents/Audacity"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> She explained that that is precisely what her company did with the software
>>>>>> for its
>>>>>> various products.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now I like this idea because it doesn't just lump all the exports in
>>>>>> Documents jumbled
>>>>>>
>>>>>> up with whatever the else the user already has in Documents which could be
>>>>>> plentiful.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also it suggests the start of an ordered taxonomy for Audacity filing,
>>>>>> encouraging the
>>>>>>
>>>>>> user to think a little more about that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm surprised I overlooked thinking about this  when we were recently
>>>>>> discussing
>>>>>> bug #1304as this is exactly how I have been operating ever since I started
>>>>>> out with using
>>>>>> Audacity.  One of my first actions was to create a folder called "Audacity
>>>>>> Projects" in my
>>>>>> Documents folder.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Peter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Audacity-quality mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Audacity-quality mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Where we store exported "stuff"

Peter Sampson-2
Cliff wrote:
>Could be, but Documents makes no sense to me at all.

Makes a lot more sense than placing it by default into the Applications
folder on Mac and itts eqivalent on Windows both of which are:
a) a privileged location
b) a fundamentally unsuitable place to store application data


>Some people see it differently than others and it's easy to change.

Yes, of course it's easy to change - but it's odd how many folk don't seem
to bother. 

If you saw the number of people over the years writing to the Forum to complain
that they can't save their exported audio (because they are unprivileged users
trying to store in a privileged location) you would understand better the reason for
this switch.

And in the current alpha we have already made the chage to offer the default
location as documents - this suggestion is merely an extension of that.

And I agree with Gale that the Music folder is not appropriate for many of our
users.  Apart from the auudio book creators we also have many off-the-wall
uses of Audacity: dolphin sounds, bat  sounds, the stethoscope that Vaughan
developed, paranormal activity etc.

Peter.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Where we store exported "stuff"

James Crook
In reply to this post by Gale

On 1/24/2017 12:09 AM, Gale Andrews wrote:

On 23 January 2017 at 23:22, Peter Sampson
[hidden email] wrote:
GAle wrote:
[hidden email] wrote:

Mrs S wrote:
"Why don't you make Audacity create an Audacity folder immediately under the Documents folder?"  i.e.   " ..../Documents/Audacity"
Given there seems to be some traction for this should we:

a) reopen #1304 as a P4 Enh,
http://bugzilla.audacityteam.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1304

b) add this to #1305,
http://bugzilla.audacityteam.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1305

c) open a new P4 Enh and link to #1304 and #1305 ?
I prefer just doing it (for Windows only and if James agrees)
I prior discussed this with James before I floated this idea in public.

He approved it then - without that approval I wouldn't have bothered.
We were discussing it for all 3 platforms then, so I have no idea what
his views would be on Windows-only.
Hopefully he'll tell us...
A Documents/Audacity folder seems a sensible enhancement/change.  P4 I'd say.  We're frozen!  So It's a no from RM for 2.1.3.  If some doer does it as part of a patch for path P2 fixes I agree to for 2.1.3 then I would let the enh through with that patch, I guess.

I don't have jurisdiction over 2.1.4.  It's an enh request.  Best way to handle it is for Peter to note it on his wiki page, and get a developer interested once we're on 2.1.4.  Steve's points about tracking feature requests are relevant here.  It WOULD be nice to have a non-bugzilla mechanism to track and rate suggestions like this one.

--James.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Where we store exported "stuff"

Peter Sampson-2
I've just logged this on Bugzilla as Enh #1580
http://bugzilla.audacityteam.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1580

Peter

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Where we store exported "stuff"

Peter Sampson-2
>Steve's points about tracking feature requests are relevant here. 
>It WOULD be nice to have a non-bugzilla mechanism to track
>and rate suggestions like this one.

I agree - would it be possible for us to run two separate Bugzilla databases
one for bugs and the other for enhancements?

The reason I logged this on Bugzilla ia that is far too small an issue for a
formal Proposal - but, I think, is an issue worth tracking.

Peter.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Where we store exported "stuff"

James Crook
On 1/24/2017 10:50 AM, Peter Sampson wrote:
>> Steve's points about tracking feature requests are relevant here.
>> It WOULD be nice to have a non-bugzilla mechanism to track
>> and rate suggestions like this one.
> I agree - would it be possible for us to run two separate Bugzilla databases
> one for bugs and the other for enhancements?

Don't think a bugzilla tracker is right for those enhancement and
feature requests that we agree aren't bugs.  Q&A software would work
better, allowing good ideas to 'float to the top', but is still not
ideal.  Question2Answer looks to be one of the best Q&A platforms.

http://www.question2answer.org/qa/55932/show-profile-picture-on-question-page


A question would be a proposal, and answers would be individuals
responses/refinements to the proposal.  Voting should bring the best
proposals and responses to the top.

The problem with enhancements is that they need discussion - which clogs
up the comment trail in bugzilla.  With Q&A software there is pattern of
summary.  And it has voting built in.

--James.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Audacity-quality mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/audacity-quality
12
Loading...